THE     CENTURY   BIBLE    HANDBOOKS 

Christian  Ethics 

PROF,  R.  MACKINTOSH,  D.  D, 


/2-./SL./ 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


BS  417  .C46  v.10 
Mackintosh,  Robert,  1858 

1933. 
Christian  ethics 


CENTURY   BIBLE   HANDBOOKS 

General  Editor 
Principal  WALTER  F.  ADEXEY,  M.A.,  D.D. 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


CHRISTIAN  ETHICS 


SEVK 


BY 

ROBERT  MACKINTOSH,  M.A.,  D.D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  ETHICS,    CHRISTIAN   SOCIOLOGY 

AND   APOLOGETICS  IN   LANCASHIRE   INDEPENDENT    COLLEGE 

LECTURER   IN    THE   UNIVERSITY   OF    MANCHESTER 


HODDER   AND   STOUGHTON 

NEW   YORK 

1909 


To 
MISS    ISABEL    GRACE    CHALMERS 

IN  REMEMBRANCE 

OF    MUCH    KINDNESS    AND 

A    GREAT    SORROW 

1879  I909 


CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTORY 

CHAP. 

I.    DEFINITIONS    AND    CAUTIONS 


PAGE 

I 


II.    THEOLOGICAL      POSTULATES      OF      CHRISTIAN 

ETHICS    ....-••  IO 

III.    CHRISTIAN        ETHICS       AND       PHILOSOPHICAL 

ETHICS l8 


HISTORICAL 

IV.  ETHICS    OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT 

V.  PHARISEE    ETHICS  . 

VI.  CHRIST'S    ETHICAL    TEACHING 

VII.  ETHICAL    TEACHING    IN     THE    EPISTLES 

VIII.  ETHICAL    IDEAS    OF    CATHOLICISM 

XI.  PROTESTANT   ETHICS      . 


29 

40 
46 
53 

66 

75 


xii  CONTENTS 

CONSTRUCTIVE 

CHAP.  PAGE 

X.    STANDARDS     OF    AUTHORITY     IN     CHRISTIAN 

ETHICS 84 

XI.    THE    BEGINNINGS    OF     THE    CHRISTIAN     LIFE         95 

XII.    OUR    RELATION    TO    GOD    IN    THE    NEW    LIFE  105 

XIII.  CHRISTIAN    DUTIES 112 

XIV.  CHRISTIAN    VIRTUES      .             .             .             .             .  I  24 
XV.    CHRISTIAN    SOCIAL    INSTITUTIONS             .            .  135 

PROBLEMS 

XVI.    SOME    OPEN    QUESTIONS  ....  I4t 

XVII.    CHRISTIANITY    AND    THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM    .  1 59 

INDEX 173 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

CHAPTER    I 

DEFINITIONS    AND   CAUTIONS 

Christian  ethics  are  a  systematic  study  of  the  duties 
of  Christians  as  individuals  and  in  society.  It  differs 
from  general  ethics  in  that  it  takes  express  cognisance 
of  the  Christian  facts,  forces,  and  motives.  Thus, 
primarily  at  least,  it  is  ethics  for  Christians.  It  differs 
from  Christian  doctrine  in  that  it  considers  the  Christian 
man  or  the  Christian  society  as  the  agent  in  well-doing, 
though  helped  and  inspired  by  God,  whereas  doctrine 
rather  studies  God  as  the  doer  of  all  things  in  providence 
and  redemption. 

We  must  not  expect  too  much  from  Christian  ethics. 
If  systematic  knowledge  could  save,  the  law,  not  the 
gospel,  would  be  the  way  of  redemption.  Neither  Christ 
nor  St.  Paul  deals  in  ethical  system;  almost  the  only 
approach  to  it  in  the  New  Testament  being  the  table  of 
Family  Duties  in  Colossians,  Ephesians,  and  I.  Peter. 

A 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


This  lack  of  formal  teaching  is  no  accident ;  still  less  is  it 
a  defect.  The  hampering  letter  is  obsolete.  Christians 
are  to  act  from  loving  hearts,  as  led  by  God's  Spirit.  It  is 
a  grievous  relapse  when  legalism  becomes  master  of  the 
Christian  Church  throughout  the  Middle  Ages.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  is  room  for  Christian  ethics.  The 
disciples  of  Christ  are  to  act  from  conscious  intelligent 
deliberate  choice.  It  is  our  duty  as  well  as  our  privilege 
to  study  from  every  side  the  high  calling  of  God  in  Christ 
Jesus,  and  to  learn  lessons  by  means  of  reflective  study. 
Only,  let  us  remember  that  our  task  is  secondary.  Practi- 
cal godliness  and  personal  conscientiousness  come  first. 
As  a  separate  branch  of  study,  Christian  ethics 
is  comparatively  young.  The  theological  systems,  or 
Summcz,  of  the  mediaeval  schoolmen  included  everything 
— duty  no  less  than  doctrine.  It  was  only  after  the 
Reformation  that  theology,  Roman  Catholic  and  Protes- 
tant, began  to  divide  and  subdivide  into  different  branches 
and  sections.  The  Roman  Catholic  name  for  what  we 
call  Christian  Ethics  is  "  Moral  Theology";  and  the 
Roman  Church  always  aims  mainly,  though  not  exclu- 
sively, at  manuals  for  father  confessors — handbooks  of 
Church  law  for  the  treatment  of  sinful  souls.  There  is 
thus  a  gulf  fixed  between  Roman  and  Protestant  ideals. 
"  Christian  Ethics  "  appears  for  the  first  time  as  the  name 
of  a  treatise  by  a  French  Protestant  theologian  settled  at 
Geneva — Daneau,  or  "  Danseus  "  ;  a  Reformed  theologian 


DEFINITIONS    AND    CAUTIONS     3 

in  the  stricter  sense  (Calvinist-Zwinglian,  in  contrast  to 
the  Lutherans).  The  main  feature  of  Daneau's  treatise 
is  his  exposition  of  the  Ten  Commandments.  Christianity 
is  gloriously  pre-eminent  in  having  this  perfect  Divine 
revelation  of  duty  !  That  is  not  quite  our  modern  view 
(chap,  x.) ;  nor  should  we  claim  superiority  to  Moral 
Philosophy  on  the  special  ground  of  the  Decalogue. 
Daneau  seems  to  us,  in  a  way,  legalist — just  as  Puritanism 
was  in  many  ways  legalist.  To  live  up  to  the  programme 
of  liberty  is  a  hard  task ;  and  Protestantism  was  in  no 
small  danger  of  falling  to  pieces  when  Daneau's  master, 
Calvin,  stretched  forth  his  strong,  grim  hands  and — 
at  a  pretty  heavy  price — saved  the  situation.  The 
first  recorded  Lutheran  treatise  on  our  subject  is  by 
the  godly  and  peace-loving  Georg  Oalixtus  (Theologia 
Moralis,  1634). 

But  the  modern  study  of  Christian  ethics  as  a  science 
among  Protestants  dates  from  the  life-work  of  Schleier- 
macher  (1 768-1834).  Even  where  his  doctrines  are  dis- 
trusted, his  views  on  questions  of  system  have  had  great 
influence.  He  concluded,  with  some  hesitation,  that 
Christian  doctrine  and  Christian  ethics  were  the  two 
independent,  co-ordinate  branches  of  systematic  theo- 
logy, and — with  less  hesitation — that  Christian  ethics 
and  philosophical  ethics  were  independent,  co-ordinate 
sciences,  studying  duty.  In  agreement  with  these  views, 
he  wrote  himself  (more  than  once)  upon  philosophical 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


ethics;  wrote  also  upon  Christian  ethics;  and  wrote 
(of  course)  upon  Christian  doctrine.  In  his  principal 
treatise  upon  philosophical  ethics,  Schleiermacher  made 
use  of  a  threefold  subdivision,  discussing  ethics  from  the 
point  of  view  of  Virtue,  of  Duty  (or  of  the  moral  law), 
and  of  the  Chief  Good.  Schleiermacher  did  not  himself 
apply  this  scheme  to  Christian  ethics  ;  but  the  example 
of  another  illustrious  German  Protestant  divine,  Richard 
Rothe  {Theological  Ethics,  1845,  an^  later),  made  this 
threefold  subdivision  dominant  for  a  long  time  in  the 
text-books  of  our  own  study.  Lately,  it  has  become 
unpopular  because  of  the  repetition  it  involves.  At  the 
present  day  there  is  no  accepted  method  of  analysing 
Christian  ethics  into  detail.  Every  teacher  takes  his 
own  way.  Of  course,  the  three  studies,  or  sciences, 
stand — Dogmatic  Theology,  Christian  Ethics,  Philoso- 
phical Ethics ;  though  authorities,  Roman  Catholic  and 
Protestant,  sometimes  repeat  Schleiermacher's  doubt — 
whether  it  is  wise  to  separate  the  treatment  of  Christian 
ethics  from  that  of  doctrine. 

Theologians,  then,  regard  Christian  ethics  primarily 
as  a  science.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  meant,  first  of  all, 
not  to  edify,  but  to  enlighten  ;  not  to  make  us  better,  but 
wiser.  The  same  thing  is  still  more  plainly  true  of  doctrinal 
theology ;  although  of  course,  indirectly,  all  theology 
exists  for  the  edifying  of  the  Church,  and  a  so-called 
"scientific"  theology — in  the  sense  of  being  indifferent 


DEFINITIONS    AND    CAUTIONS     5 

to  the  Christian  life — is  a  monstrosity.  Nor  must  we 
press  too  far  the  conception  of  scientific  Christian  ethics 
even  in  the  narrower  sense  in  which  scientific  means 
systematic.  It  might  be  a  task  for  an  archangel,  upon 
a  holiday  afternoon  in  heaven,  to  discuss  in  systematic 
shape  the  duty  of  all  Christians  everywhere  in  every  age. 
But  on  earth  we  do  better  to  follow  the  example  of  the 
Master  and  His  apostles,  and  to  speak,  so  far  as  we  can, 
to  the  hour.  What  else,  indeed,  could  a  brief,  popular 
book  attempt  ?  Even  the  larger  treatises  on  our  subject 
include  a  good  deal  of  practical  or  applied  ethics.  And 
that  is  nothing  to  be  ashamed  of. 

The  separation  from  doctrine  has  its  difficulties. 
If  we  ask — first,  what  am  I  to  believe  ?  secondly,  what 
am  I  to  do?  we  tend  to  separate  treatment.  (So, 
substantially,  in  the  Westminster  Assembly's  Shorter 
Catechism.)  We  ought  very  carefully  to  examine  these 
questions  before  we  accept  them  as  guiding  clues ! 
For,  if  we  ask  instead,  What  is  the  truth  about  doc-, 
trine  ?  and,  What  is  the  truth  about  my  duty  ?  it  looks 
as  if  the  two  discussions  ought  to  be  closely  combined. 
The  author  of  a  memorable  treatment  on  the  Atone- 
ment, John  M'Leod  Campbell,  suggested1  that  if  our 
doctrine  was  what  it  ought  to  be — thoroughly  ethical 
and  spiritual — we  should  not  need  to  bring  in  Christian 
ethics  as  a  counterpoise.  This  is  indeed  a  home-thrust. 
1  Nature  of  the  Atonement ',  chap.  xv. 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


Perhaps  we  may  admit  that  the  Johannine  type  of 
New  Testament  teaching  does  not  lend  itself  to  such 
division.  And  our  Scottish  St.  John  had  himself  a  Johan- 
nine or — as  it  is  sometimes  (wisely  or  unwisely)  termed — 
a  "  mystical "  mind,  seeing  the  unity  in  all  truth  rather 
than  the  distinctions.  But  there  are  many  mansions 
in  our  Father's  house.  Christ's  own  teaching,  as 
found  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  is  a  teaching  of  duty 
with  doctrine  implied  in  it;  and  St.  Paul  separates 
the  two  {e.g.  Rom.  i.-xi.  and  Rom.  xii.-xv.),  though 
with  him  doctrine  predominates  and  duty  comes  in 
as  a  corollary,  introduced  with  a  mighty  "  therefore  " 
(Rom.  xii.  i).  The  last  thing  which  students  of  Chris- 
tian ethics  contemplate  is  to  allow  doctrine  to  be 
less  than  ethical.  We  rather  wish  to  watch  over  the 
ethical  implications  of  doctrine.  On  the  whole,  both 
subjects  ought  to  gain  in  ethical  quality  by  separate  and 
detailed  treatment. 

The  frontier  between  Christian  and  philosophical 
ethics  is  also  hard  to  define.  On  the  one  hand,  what 
is  Christian  is  to  be  found  with  Christ  alone.  On  the 
other  hand,  whatever  is  truly  Christian  appeals  to  the 
universal  conscience,  and  Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  the 
world.  We  here  strike  upon  the  vexed  problem  of 
faith  and  reason ;  or  reason  and  revelation ;  or  God's 
immanence  and  His  transcendent  action ;  or  of  the 
natural   and    the    supernatural.      Put   into   a   different 


DEFINITIONS    AND    CAUTIONS     7 

region,  that  of  outward  institutions,  our  problem  takes 
a  new  form — that  of  Church  and  State.  Let  us  com- 
pare with  each  other  the  following  proposals.  Thomas 
Arnold  (of  Rugby)  held  that  the  Church  was  identical 
with  the  State.  His  State  was  to  maintain  a  Christian 
creed,  while  practising  the  widest  possible  comprehen- 
sion within  Christianity.  Hence  Arnold  nearly  broke 
his  heart  when  Jews  were  admitted  to  Parliament.  Next, 
we  have  Rothe's  view.  As  the  State  becomes  more  and 
more  efficient,  moralised,  godly,  the  Church  (as  an  ex- 
ternal institution)  must  shrink  to  smaller  and  smaller 
dimensions.  The  State  must  increase  and  the  Church 
decrease.  When  all  the  lump  is  leavened,  what  need 
for  the  separate  existence  of  the  leaven?  The  State 
will  gradually  assume  all  Church  functions.  Again, 
a  rather  more  recent  German  writer,  I.  A.  Dorner,  held 
that  as  general  philosophical  ethics  ripened,  separate 
treatment  of  Christian  ethics  must  fade  away.  And 
once  more  a  brilliant,  if  erratic,  Scottish  teacher  of  a 
generation  ago,  Dr.  Jas.  Macgregor  (afterwards  of  New 
Zealand)  poured  contempt  on  the  very  idea  of  separating 
Christian  ethics  from  general  ethics.  Duty  is  the  same 
thing  everywhere  (under  like  circumstances)  to  all  men ; 
and  their  consciences  know  it  to  be  so.  This  is  the 
standpoint  of  Intuitionalist  ethics  (below,  chap.  iii.  p.  23). 
Very  similarly,  one  of  the  most  profound  and  spiritual 
of  recent  German  writers  on  our  subject,  Dr.  Herrmann 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


of  Marburg,  calls  his  treatise  Ethics,  not  Christian 
ethics.  His  view  (if  we  may  put  it  roughly)  is  that, 
while  all  morally  earnest  men  know  what  the  ideal  is, 
the  only  motive  which  shows  itself  capable  of  fulfilling 
the  ideal  is  the  knowledge  and  love  of  Christ. 

The  present  writer  cannot  accept  any  of  the  drastic 
solutions  mentioned  above.  As  far  ahead  as  we  can 
see,  Christian  ethics  and  philosophical  must  stand  apart, 
and  the  Church  must  complement  the  State.  The  philo- 
sophers as  such,  studying  reason  and  the  natural  con- 
science, is  not  in  a  position  to  say  that  "the  love  of 
Christ  constrains  us."  Can  the  Christian  ever  cease  to 
say  that?  So  profound  a  motive  must  also  cast  fuller 
light  upon  the  scope  and  meaning  of  duty. 

One  more  caution.  There  is  danger  of  our  supposing 
that  we  have  fully  fathomed  Christ's  calling.  On  ethics, 
if  anywhere,  the  Lord  hath  yet  more  light  to  break  forth 
from  His  Holy  Word.  The  ethic  practised  by  Christians 
always  falls  short  of  truly  Christian  ethics.  It  seems  right, 
therefore,  to  conclude  this  short  study  by  some  reference 
to  unsolved  or  half- solved  problems. 

Books  for  English  readers.  The  most  interesting  of 
the  older  books  on  Christian  ethics  is  the  Danish  bishop 
Martensen's,  translated  in  three  volumes.  The  first 
volume  especially  has  a  fine  literary  touch  and  a  true 
spiritual  ring.  Of  course  it  is  pretty  diffuse.  Dr.  Newman 
Smyth's  volume  in  the  International  Theological  Series  is 


DEFINITIONS    AND    CAUTIONS     9 

the  interesting  talk  of  a  kind  and  broad-minded  American 
Christian.  Dr.  T.  B.  Strong's  Bampton  Lecture  shows 
how  far  an  Anglican  can  go  towards  the  Roman  Catholic 
outlook  in  matters  of  Christian  ethics.  On  a  smaller 
scale,  with  good  practical  and  devotional  quality,  if  again 
with  an  emphasis  upon  sacraments  which  evangelical 
Protestants  may  distrust,  is  Dr.  J.  R.  Illing worth's 
Christian  Character.  Dr.  T.  B.  Kilpatrick's  book  with 
the  same  title — incorporating  discussions  on  "  Christian 
Character "  and  on  "  Christian  Conduct " — is  also  in 
manageable  compass,  and  is  probably  the  best  thing  on 
Christian  ethics  in  our  language  for  zeal  and  enthusiasm. 
In  teaching  a  class  of  Christian  Ethics,  the  writer  has 
found  it  a  very  good  plan  to  read  in  class  selected  chap- 
ters from  Butler's  Analogy  (to  enforce  the  foundation 
truth  of  responsibility)  and  selected  chapters  from  Ecce 
Homo  (to  enforce  the  new  social  enthusiasm  which  Jesus 
Christ  lived  and  taught). 


CHAPTER   II 

THEOLOGICAL  POSTULATES  OF  CHRISTIAN 
ETHICS 

Can  we  define  more  exactly  how  Christian  ethics  com- 
pare with  dogmatic  (or  doctrinal)  theology  ?  The  West- 
minster Assembly's  Shorter  Catechism  (p.  5)  spoke  of 
"  what  man  is  to  believe  concerning  God,"  as  contrasted 
with  "what  duty  God  requires  of  man."  But  doctrine 
includes  other  truths  besides  those  which  deal  with  God 
or  Christ ;  it  speaks  about  man,  about  sin,  about  salvation, 
about  the  last  things.  What  is  left  over  for  Christian 
ethics  ?  We  must  approach  the  subject  from  a  different 
point  of  view,  covering  part  of  the  same  ground,  but  with 
a  fresh  outlook  (p.  1).  Christian  ethic  will  be  a  view  of 
the  Christian  life  from  the  inside,  while  it  is  still  in 
progress  and  unfinished.  There  cannot  but  be  this  two- 
fold way  of  looking  at  the  divine  life.  "  Not  I,  but 
Christ"  (Gal.  ii.  20)  is  a  deep,  deep  truth.  "Workers 
together  with  God"  (I.  Cor.  iii.  9  ;  II.  Cor.  vi.  1) — that 
is  deep  truth  too. 


THEOLOGICAL    POSTULATES     n 

We  might  further  define  our  relation  to  doctrine 
by  saying  that  Christian  ethic  makes  certain  doctrinal 
postulates  or  assumptions.  If  there  are  theological 
teachings  which  make  no  difference  in  the  life  of  duty, 
they  are  irrelevant  to  Christian  ethics.  But  doctrine 
generally  will  either  help  or  hinder.  We  demand  what 
helps ;  we  refuse  what  hinders — unless  it  can  be  reinter- 
preted, or  have  its  character  changed  through  being 
associated  with  other  complementary  views  of  truth. 
Part  of  the  business  of  Christian  ethic  is  to  keep 
doctrine  ethical. 

(1)  The  first  "theological  postulate  of  Christian  ethics," 
according  to  Dr.  Newman  Smyth,  is  the  Christian,  or, 
as  he  prefers  to  write,  the  "  ethical  idea  of  God."  God's 
power  must  be  qualified  in  our  thoughts  by  what  we  term 
His  moral  attributes,  and  we  must  place  the  latter  higher. 
Not  that  we  deny  His  omnipotence.  He  is  "  stronger 
than  we"  (I.  Cor.  x.  22).  And  this  boundless  strength 
is  ours,  in  Christ,  to  save  us.  Yet  we  look  beyond 
it  to  "  the  love  that  tops  the  power,  the  Christ  in 
God." 

Further :  within  the  ethical  attributes  we  recognise  a 
certain  gradation,  (a)  The  first  truth  confessed  of  the 
Christian  God  beyond  mere  power  is  benevolence  or 
kindness.  This  is  much  dwelt  on  by  the  pleasure  philo- 
sophy (pp.  18,  23).  (b)  More  deeply  ethical  is  the  view 
of  God — in  seeming  contrast  to  His  benevolence — as 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


just,  and  so  (Bp.  Butler  would  insist)  punishing  evil- 
doers rather  than  displaying  indiscriminate  benevolence 
towards  all  men  (p.  25).  (c)  Supreme  in  the  scale  stands 
God's  love  or  grace,  which  we  might  describe  as  benevo- 
lence at  a  higher  level ;  or,  benevolence  which  has  taken 
justice  into  its  heart ;  or,  a  justice  that  is  more  than  just 
— a  mercy  "glorying  against"  mere  "judgment"  (Jas. 
ii.  1 3).  This  love  or  grace  of  God  saves  sinners.  The 
Christian  or  ethical  idea  of  God  includes  the  great 
doctrine  of  Salvation.  The  God  we  presuppose  is  God 
in  Christ. 

(2)  We  have  therefore  to  discuss  our  relation  in 
Christian  ethics  to  the  doctrine  of  sin.  Dr.  Strong  has 
specially  emphasised  this  doctrine.  Sin  for  the  Christian 
cannot  be  mere  "  defect,"  as  it  may  be  for  the  "  meta- 
physician," but  must  be  "  rebellion."  This  is  a  reason- 
able warning.  The  moral  consciousness  (which  philo- 
sophical ethics  study)  contains  all  the  materials  for  a 
doctrine  of  sin ;  and  yet  it  is  plain  historical  fact  that 
man  when  conscious  of  the  presence  of  a  holy  God  thinks 
of  sin  as  sinful — never  besides.  But  is  all  sin  a  wilful 
and  deliberate  rebellion  ?  Dr.  D.  W.  Simon 1  has  pointed 
out  how  easy  it  is  to  exaggerate  this  solemn  doctrine, 
and  how  dangerous  the  consequences  may  be.  Men 
come  into  this  world,  not  as  free  agents  unpledged  to 
right  or  wrong,  but  as  little  children  born  into  a  tainted 
1  Reconciliation  by  Incarnation,  chap.  viii. 


THEOLOGICAL    POSTULATES     13 

society,  and  in-breathing  its  sin-stained  life  from  every 
word  and  custom  and  institution. 

There  seem  to  be  two  views  of  sin  taught  in  the  Bible 
and  commending  themselves  to  the  Christian  conscience. 
One  view  dwells  upon  the  identity  in  quality  of  all  evil 
decisions.  Every  sin  is — sin.  In  the  most  secret  and  (so 
to  speak)  the  smallest  wrong-doing  (or  wrong-feeling), 
there  exists,  however  latent,  the  fatal  element  of  rebellion 
against  a  higher  known  good,  and  of  preference  for  what 
is  known  to  be  evil.  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  sin  has  its 
degrees  and  stages.  It  is  unchristian  to  say  that  all  sins 
weigh  equally  heavy  in  the  scales  of  justice ;  that  was 
one  of  the  strained  paradoxes  of  the  Stoics.  As  there  is 
a  decision  for  Christ  in  every  happy  human  life,  so  there 
comes  to  be  a  decision  against  Christ,  against  God, 
against  goodness,  in  every  miserable  human  life.  We 
have  no  right  to  affirm  that  any  fellow-man  has  arrived 
at  that  awful  decision ;  we  have  no  right  to  ignore  that 
we  ourselves  may  be  drifting  towards  such  a  decision, 
and  may  be  very  near  it.  Not  until  such  a  decision  is 
come  to — "wilfully"  (Heb.  x.  26),  by  a  sin  "unto 
death"  (I.  John  v.  16) — do  we  have  the  fatal  separa- 
tion from  God  and  goodness  which  the  other  doctrine 
might  seem  to  impute  to  every  human  child. 

We  need  to  combine  these  two  doctrines.  Just  as 
Salvation  may  (and  must)  be  interpreted  both  as  God's 
gift  and  as  man's  choice,  even  so  sin  may  and  must  be 


i4  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

interpreted  both  as  one  hideous  evil,  uniform  through- 
out because  everywhere  sinful,  and  as  a  thing  that  grows 
from  less  to  more  till  in  the  end — if  the  awful  end  is 
ever  reached — it  proves  fatal.  A  reconciliation  might 
be  found  in  the  fact  that  you  cannot  limit  the  evil  poten- 
tialities of  a  single  "  small "  sin.  It  is  not  done  with. 
It  lives  on,  working  corruption,  unless  it  is  dried  up  and 
healed  by  the  miracle-working  grace  of  God.  You  can- 
not measure  it  "  from  side  to  side,"  just  "  three  feet  long 
and  two  feet  wide."  It  is  an  infinite  spring  of  woe; 
"a  restless  evil,  full  of  deadly  poison"  (Jas.  hi.  8). 
Yet  there  are  other  acts  of  sin  which  have  ripened  further 
towards  the  final  and  fatal  corruption. 

If  it  were  necessary  to  choose  between  these  two 
doctrines,  then  the  doctrine  of  sin  as  one  in  process  of 
growth  would  be  the  one  proper  to  Christian  ethics. 

(3)  Christian  ethic  treats  man,  even  in  sin,  as  respon- 
sible, and  so  as  capable  of  choosing  the  better  part  and 
of  grasping  the  means  of  deliverance.  We  are  in  a 
world  which  it  seems  impossible  that  any  child  of  man 
(save  One)  should  traverse  without  something  of  shame, 
and  of  the  sickness  of  an  evil  conscience.  This  is 
indeed  a  mystery ;  yet  we  know  it  not  merely  as  a  doc- 
trine, but  as  an  experience  that  every  man  has  made 
for  himself.  On  the  other  hand,  Christian  ethic  pro- 
tests against  the  doctrine  that  man  is  unfree  yet  respon- 
sible,    (a)  Primarily,  freedom  is  the  lot  of  Christians. 


THEOLOGICAL    POSTULATES     15 

They  alone  thoroughly  escape  from  evil  in  loving  God 
and  goodness  through  the  love  of  Christ.  It  is  true, 
every  one  who  loves  wife  or  child  or  country  or  friend 
is,  so  far,  a  free  man.  But  the  central  victory  is  gained 
in  loving  God.  And  it  is  Christ  who  invites  us  to  that 
love,  and  makes  it  possible.  For  Christ  shows  us  God's 
love  towards  us,  and  brings  us  His  pardon,  (b)  Ethic 
implies  that  no  individual  act  of  sin  is  necessitated. 
We  could  not  treat  man  as  responsible  if,  at  any  single 
point,  he  were  forced  into  wrong-doing.  Therefore,  at 
least  in  this  limited  sense,  Christian  ethics,  like  all 
genuine  ethics,  affirms  the  freedom  of  the  will  in  all 
men. 

(c)  It  is  a  more  difficult  problem  whether  Christian 
ethics  has  anything  to  affirm,  by  way  of  postulate,  re- 
garding the  possibility  of  making  the  grand  decision,  in 
favour  of  goodness,  apart  from  the  knowledge  of  Christ. 
Christian  ethics  are  ethics  for  Christians  ;  do  such  ethics 
include  assertions  about  non-Christians  ?  Only  if  such 
assertions  are  bound  up,  by  strict  logical  necessity, 
with  others  more  proper  to  our  subject — assertions  re- 
garding Christians  themselves.  One  thing  is  plain.  We 
cannot  hold  that  mankind  are  in  any  full  sense  respon- 
sible beings  if  they  have  not  this  larger  freedom.  If 
non-Christian  humanity  are  fated,  do  what  they  may, 
to  prefer  evil  to  good,  they  have  no  probation ;  but,  when 
there  is  no  chance  of  doing  better,  no  fresh  guilt  can  be 


16  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

incurred.  It  seems  in  every  way  probable  that,  not 
merely  isolated  good  actions,  but  a  sincere  love  and 
preference  for  goodness  may  be  found  even  apart  from 
knowledge  of  the  historical  Christ,  however  the  mind 
may  be  darkened  by  error  and  the  will  entangled  among 
uncut  bonds  of  sin. 

(d)  When  God's  message  is  delivered,  it  is  possible 
for  men  to  accept  it.  Christian  ethics  can  never  tolerate 
the  opposite  doctrine,  (e)  When  the  Gospel  message  is 
heard,  responsibility  must  rise.  "  Times  of  ignorance  " 
are  over ;  "  God  commandeth  all  men  every  where  to 
repent  "  (Acts  xvii.  30).  More  is  given  and  more  will  be 
required  (Luke  xii.  48).  Yet  the  most  notable  effect  of 
preaching  Christ  will  be,  ethically,  to  make  God's  appeal 
almost  infinitely  stronger  and  more  persuasive,  and  to 
bind  together  those  who  accept  the  call  in  a  conscious 
and  glorious  fellowship,  not  only  of  faith  but  of  service, 
as  workers  together  with  God.  Also  Christ  promises  us 
final  deliverance  from  evil  (in  the  heavenly  life).  No 
other  authority  can  give  that  pledge,  (f)  We  sum  up 
these  positions  by  saying  that,  while  it  seems  possible 
men  should  lean  towards  the  good  amid  great  dark- 
ness, Christ  remains  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  as 
such  the  only  Saviour. 

(g)  It  has  been  the  general  teaching  of  the  Christian 
Church  that  sinless  perfection  is  never  reached  in  this 
life.     "In  many  things  we  all  stumble"  (Jas.    iii.   2), 


THEOLOGICAL    POSTULATES     17 

and  Christ  teaches  disciples  to  pray,  as  for  daily  bread, 
so  also  for  pardon  (Matt.  vi.  12).  When  it  is  taught  in 
serious  quarters — e.g.  by  John  Wesley  and  his  followers 
— that  a  certain  perfection  is  possible  on  earth,  the 
desire  is,  that  we  should  not  limit  the  power  of  God's 
grace.  The  New  Testament  itself,  with  what  some 
moderns  call  its  enthusiastic  morals  (pp.  56,  60),  contains 
very  strong  affirmations :  He  that  is  begotten  of  God 
sinneth  not  (I.  John  v.  18) ;  He  cannot  sin  (hi.  9).  This 
is  one  of  the  points  where  curious  analysis  seems  rather 
to  hinder  than  to  help  the  moral  life.  What  do  we 
gain  by  laying  down  the  Puritan  doctrine,  that  we  must 
"  daily  "  sin  "in  thought,  word,  and  deed  "  ?  It  will  be 
better  to  content  ourselves  with  teaching  that  as  long  as 
we  live,  we  must  take  the  sinner's  place.  We  have 
sinned ;  the  possibility  remains ;  the  dreadful  fact  too 
often  recurs.     How  often,  God  knows.1 

1  Some  further  remarks  on  free-will  occur  pp.  19,  27. 


CHAPTER   III 

CHRISTIAN   ETHICS   AND   PHILOSOPHICAL 
ETHICS 

Our  study  must  postulate  at  the  hands  of  philosophy  a 
scheme  of  ethics  which  admits  the  Christian  view  of  the 
world.  True,  many  different  schools  of  ethical  opinion 
may  find  adherents  among  Christian  men.  And  that  is 
well,  for  different  aspects  of  the  many-sided  truth  will 
thus  be  elucidated.  Yet  necessarily  some  schools  of 
philosophy  are  nearer  the  Christian  position  than  others. 
And  (see  p.  8)  Christianity  has  its  own  peculiar  and 
crowning  ethical  truths. 

Our  school  of  ethics  defines  the  aim  of  life  as  happi- 
ness, and  takes  happiness  to  mean  exactly  the  same  thing 
as  pleasure.  We  call  this  doctrine  (by  a  word  formed 
from  the  Greek  word  for  pleasure)  Hedonism.  .  It  is  a 
plausible  view.  It  seems  to  make  the  study  of  human 
welfare,  and  of  the  things  promoting  welfare,  agreeably 
simple.  Yet  difficulties  begin  at  once.  The  only 
thoroughly  logical  form  of  the  doctrine  is  "  individual 

18 


PHILOSOPHICAL    ETHICS         10 

hedonism,"  or  Egoism.  It  is  my  own  pleasure  that  I  am 
to  seek.  If  I  include  one  pleasure  of  yours  in  my  ideal, 
I  break  with  the  strict  principles  of  the  system.  Some- 
thing else  comes  in  besides  the  pleasantness  of  pleasant 
things.  For  the  pleasure  of  another  person  is  not,  to 
me,  mere  pleasure. 

Egoism  is  the  doctrine  which  most  completely  denies 
the  freedom  of  the  will.  We  have  to  go  where  pleasure 
invites,  to  flee  from  where  pain  deters  us ;  conduct  is  an 
automatic  resultant  of  all  the  pleasures  and  pains  that 
come  into  our  reckoning.  We  cannot  do  otherwise 
(this  has  been  called  psychological  hedonism).  It  is  not 
reasonable  that  we  should  do  otherwise  (this  has  been 
called  ethical  hedonism).  These  two  forms  of  hedonism 
generally  go  together !  And  yet,  if  the  first  is  well- 
founded,  what  room  is  left  for  the  second  ?  If  we  needs 
must  go  where  pleasure  allures,  it  is  foolish  to  say  either 
that  we  ought  or  that  we  ought  not  to  do  so ;  we  are 
machines,  and  cannot  help  ourselves.  On  such  a  view, 
ethics  disappear.  This  would-be  plain  and  easy  method 
explains  away  the  thing  it  undertook  to  explain.  Or,  to 
put  the  criticism  differently  :  If  there  is  room  for  saying 
"You  ought,"  that  just  means  that  we  are  not  fatally 
driven  along  the  line  of  least  resistance — that  we  can 
really  act  upon  principle,  really  pause,  really  choose. 

It  has  often  been  argued  by  English  Idealist  critics 
of  hedonism  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  sum  of 


20  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

pleasures.  Each  pleasure  in  its  turn  dies  before  the 
next  is  born.  "  You  seize  the  flower — its  bloom  is  fled." 
Hence,  it  was  argued,  the  theory  of  living  for  the  greatest 
pleasure  was  unmeaning.  A  recent  Idealist  writer,  Dr. 
Hastings  Rashdall,  rejects  this  criticism.  Indeed,  it 
sounds  a  little  too  clever.  Yet  surely  it  contains  a  truth, 
if  sharpened  into  a  paradox.  To  live  for  pleasure  is  to 
live  in  and  for  the  moment.  Such  a  life  never  can  satisfy 
a  being  made  for  permanence.  It  is  the  interests,  not 
the  pleasures,  of  life  which  redeem  it.  Pleasures  are 
useful  packing,  or  pretty  fringes,  or  elegant  kickshaws — 
but  that  is  all.  Ethics  do  not  begin  until  we  look 
beyond  the  pleasure  of  the  moment. 

Dr.  Rashdall's  protest  means  something  further.  He 
holds  that  pleasure  is  one  part  of  the  moral  ideal.  In 
a  sense  we  may  agree  with  him.  Suppose  two  souls,  one 
very  good  and  very  miserable,  in  the  martyr  pangs  of 
an  unending,  physical  hell;  the  other  very  bad,  yet  in 
the  environment  of  a  physical  heaven.  No  real  moralist 
could  doubt  that  it  would  be  incomparably  better  to 
share  with  the  first  than  with  the  second.  Yet  who 
could  pretend  that  such  a  lot  was  completely  satisfac- 
tory? No — we  must  ask  of  God  to  make  the  good 
happy.     And  He  will  do  so. 

We  may  concede  that  the  pleasure  philosophy,  in  its 
rigidly  logical  form,  stands,  however  unworthily,  for  one 
great  truth — ultimate  happiness  is  part  of  the  moral 


PHILOSOPHICAL    ETHICS        21 

ideal.  But  such  happiness  is  not  mere  pleasure,  how- 
ever frequently  repeated.  It  gets  its  meaning  and  worth 
from  its  combination  with  higher  elements  of  the  ideal. 
It  is  like  a  bit  of  colour,  pure  and  sweet  in  itself,  but 
far  lovelier  when  it  enters  into  the  scheme  of  a  great 
picture.  Unless  thus  modified  and  transformed,  pleasure 
hardly  deserves  the  noble  name  of  happiness,  and  does 
not  at  all  deserve  to  be  called  moral. 

When  it  offers  itself  as  a  Christian  doctrine,  egoistic 
hedonism  does  so  by  affirming  that  God  in  His  strong 
power  makes  the  bad  ultimately  wretched  and  the  good 
happy ;  that  goodness  therefore  will  pay.  This  is  an  un- 
worthy motive  for  goodness,  if  it  is  the  only  or  the  chief 
motive  urged.     What  if  goodness  did  not  pay  ? 

We  shall  hardly  find  any  so-called  Christian  hedonism 
which  does  not  add  to  egoism  at  least  one  further 
element — a  doctrine  of  benevolence  or  regard  for  the 
pleasure  of  others.  The  greatest  theological  hedonist  in 
our  own  country's  history,  Paley,  proposed  the  combina- 
tion ;  Virtue  was  doing  good  to  mankind  (benevolence) 
in  obedience  to  the  will  of  God  (theology)  for  the  sake 
of  eternal  happiness  (egoism).  This  did  not  save  him 
from  Coleridge's  just  condemnation  :  "  Paley  is  not  a 
moralist." 

Perhaps  the  most  carefully  thought-out  form  of  a 
Benevolence  hedonism  is  found  in  Sidgwick's  Methods  of 
Ethics.     He  brings  in  a  new  element,  borrowed  from  the 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


philosophy  next  to  be  discussed ;  we  have  an  intui- 
tion telling  us  we  ought  to  make  others  happy.  Then 
we  calculate  out,  as  best  we  may,  what  actions  will,  in 
point  of  fact,  yield  greatest  general  happiness.  These 
are  the  right  actions !  But,  if  moral  intuitions  exist  at 
all,  can  Sidgwick  silence  them  after  they  have  made 
one  contribution  to  his  philosophy  ?  Is  that  safe  ?  Is 
it  decent  ? 

Without  theological  background  or  intuitionalist  bor- 
rowings, Bentham  the  great  law-reformer,  and  his  still 
more  distinguished  disciple,  John  Stuart  Mill,  tried 
to  work  their  way  logically  to  the  maxims  of  bene- 
volence from  a  starting-point  of  egoistic  or  psychological 
hedonism.  Every  one  does  and  must  seek  his  own  happi- 
ness (alone) — i.e.  every  one  seeks  every  one's  happiness  ; 
therefore  every  one  ought  to  seek  the  happiness  of  every 
other  !  A  line  of  argument  more  creditable  to  the  hearts 
than  the  heads  of  those  who  put  it  forward. 

Any  type  of  benevolence-philosophy  or  Universalist 
hedonism  stands  nearer  a  true  morality  than  egoism 
does.  To  do  good  to  others,  or  even  to  make  them 
happy,  is  part  of  the  Christian  scheme  of  duty.  But — 
not  to  repeat  again  criticisms  upon  its  logical  basis — 
we  cannot  get  a  complete  ethic  out  of  this  system. 
It  requires  benevolence  in  man ;  and  its  Theistic  advo- 
cates rise  to  the  thought  of  God's  benevolence;  but 
no  higher.     In  the  eighteenth  century  English  Deists, 


PHILOSOPHICAL    ETHICS        23 

German  Rationalists,  and  the  great  majority  of  the 
orthodox,  all  sang  the  same  song.  They  painted  the 
universe  in  rose-pink,  and  saw  kindness  everywhere. 
Their  wearisome  shallowness  set  the  nineteenth  century 
spinning  along  lines  of  reaction  (e.g.  pessimism),  though 
Comte's  " altruism"  is  just  benevolence  once  more 
as  the  master  maxim.  It  was  only  a  half-truth,  or  a 
smaller  fragment  still.  Yet  we  have  recognised  that 
benevolence  does  hold  its  place  among  the  ethical 
attributes  of  God  (p.  n). 

Bentham  and  Mill  called  their  philosophy  Utili- 
tarianism. They  meant  that  actions  which  are  good 
must  be  good-for-something — must  have  a  use  in  them. 
Goodness  was  made  good  by  its  good  consequences. 
We  have  already  granted  that  ultimate  happiness  does 
form  part  of  the  Christian's  moral  ideal;  but  we  can- 
not admit  that  the  external  consequences  of  an  act  are 
all  that  give  it  moral  quality.  And  now  we  pass  on 
to  speak  of  the  great  rival  of  the  pleasure  philosophy ; 
the  philosophy  which  seeks  for  acts  that  are  good-in- 
themselves. 

The  most  familiar  form  of  what  Mr.  F.  H.  Bradley 
(Ethical  Studies,  1876)  called  duty  for  duty's  sake 
is  Intuitionalism.  It  is  not  easy  to  find  professed 
philosophers  (perhaps,  Miss  F.  P.  Cobbe  ?)  who  occupy 
exactly  the  intuitionalist  attitude.  Bishop  Butler  is  very 
near  it,  with  his  emphasis  upon  "veracity  and  justice  " — 


24  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

those  seemingly  uncomfortable  virtues,  which  are  the 
backbone  of  all  lasting  happiness;  those  virtues  of 
conscious  or  unconscious  faith — speaking  the  truth, 
doing  the  right,  and  leaving  the  issue  to  God !  If  the 
Utilitarian  pleasure-philosophy  calculates  consequences 
in  order  to  ascertain  what  is  right,  the  duty-philosophy 
bids  us  listen  to  the  voice  of  conscience  and  obey  it 
"in  scorn  of  consequence."  All  men,  it  says,  have 
consciences,  which  let  them  "  see  "  their  duty — which 
give  them  "  intuition "  and  clear  vision  of  right  and 
wrong. 

The  duty-philosophy  may  take  at  least  two  distinct 
developments.  The  laxer  form  says :  As  long  as  you 
do  not  break  the  laws  of  the  land  or  of  conscience,  you 
may  please  yourself  as  to  the  positive  tendencies  of  your 
action.  You  are  "  free  "  within  these  limits.  You  have  a 
right  to  shape  your  own  career  in  your  own  way.  (The 
moral  law  saying  "  Don't " — not  very  exactingly.)  The 
severer  form — Rigorism — tells  man  that  he  is  to  produce 
the  very  maximum  crop  of  every  virtue  at  every  moment. 
He  is  to  take  no  rest.  There  is  always  something 
beyond  that  he  might  reach  after.  (The  moral  law 
saying  endlessly  "  Do.") 

These  divergent  types  agree  in  one  respect.  They  are 
both  of  them  individualist  systems,  with  a  very  negative 
outlook  on  social  duty.  The  laxer  school  exhorts  men 
to  fight  hard  for  individual  rights   (Herbert  Spencer, 


PHILOSOPHICAL    ETHICS        25 

e.g.  He  started  from  hedonism,  but  took  in  reinforce- 
ments from  intuitionalism ;  perhaps  he  robbed  such 
intuitionalist  thoughts  of  their  deeper  meaning).  The 
stricter  school  says :  Save  your  own  soul,  miserable 
man !  Its  most  noteworthy  voice  is  that  of  Kant, 
who  admitted  neither  fellowship  with  men  in  the  moral 
struggle  (morality  aims  at  "  my  own "  perfection,  and 
my  neighbour's  "happiness")  nor  the  grace  and  love 
of  God. 

With  all  its  depth  and  truth,  this  philosophy  too  is 
imperfect.  It  exaggerates  the  amount  of  agreement 
in  the  ethical  judgments  of  different  men.  There  is 
a  large  agreement ;  there  is  a  real  and  a  growing  con- 
vergence. The  wonder  of  the  inner  vision  remains,  and 
of  the  immediate  certainty  of  duty.  Yet  moral  agree- 
ment is  not  ready-made  at  the  start.  It  needs  education 
and  even  revelation  to  make  it  fully  wise.  So  too  in- 
tuitionalism may  have  discovered  the  moral  individual 
with  his  sacred  rights  and  liberties.  It  is  good  advice 
to  "keep  hold  of  him,  now  he  has  been  evolved  "  (James 
Hinton).  But  we  must  go  further ;  to  a  philosophy 
recognising  a  moral  fellowship  of  moral  individuals, 
"edifying"  one  another,  and  a  God  who  inspires  as 
well  as  rewards  goodness,  and  who  redeems  the  sinner- 
Meantime,  justice  (in  God  and  man)  is  the  characteristic 
virtue  of  intuitionalism. 

We  have  thus  seen  two  great  rival  watchwords  in 


26  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

ethics — pleasure  and  duty.  Each  has  various  develop- 
ments; each  is  imperfect  to  the  end.  On  the  lines  of 
pure  philosophy,  we  may  call  in  two  higher  standards 
to  arbitrate  and  if  possible  to  harmonise  the  warring 
claims — social  welfare  and  reason.  (Or  we  may  appeal 
to  both,  simultaneously.) 

We  have  seen  morality  interpreted  as  a  debt  to  self 
(egoism),  or  to  others,  considered  as  a  mass  of  indi- 
viduals beside  us  (altruism,  &c),  or  to  the  inner  law 
(intuitionalism).  It  will  now  be  interpreted  as  a  debt 
to  the  State,  or — rather  less  definitely — to  society. 
Plato  and  Aristotle  expounded  it  in  the  former  sense. 
Leslie  Stephen,  working  with  the  conceptions  of  biology 
and  evolution,  takes  the  other  shade  of  meaning,  and 
interprets  duty  on  what  society  demands  from  the 
individual.  There  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  all  this. 
Morality  is  good  citizenship.  Even  the  virtues  which 
seem  least  directly  remunerative  in  a  social  sense  are 
indispensable.  One  example  is  purity.  A  little  personal 
impurity  means  a  wide-spreading  social  cancer.  But 
how  are  we  to  combine  social  duty  with  individual 
rights  and  duties  ?  Is  the  private  convenience  of  society 
— which  means  the  convenience  of  a  majority — to  over- 
ride individual  claims  to  life,  to  happiness,  to  moral 
health  ?  Stephen's  analysis  fails  to  allow  for  the  inner 
coincidence  of  private  good  with  public  claim.  Good 
to  self,  good  to  others,  are  harmonised  in  good  citizen- 


PHILOSOPHICAL    ETHICS        27 

ship.  (The  "  My  Station  and  its  Duties "  of  Ethical 
Studies^)  When  this  solution  breaks  down  in  detail 
philosophical  ethic  may  be  at  a  loss ;  but  not  religious. 
We  have  God  to  appeal  to.  We  have  eternity  to  draw 
upon. 

The  philosophy  of  social  claim  might  mean  a  hideous 
social  tyranny,  extinguishing,  not  completing,  those  be- 
ginnings of  morality  found'  in  the  individual  conscience 
and  in  personal  rights.  The  last  word  of  pure  philosophy 
is  therefore  the  appeal  to  reason.  We  have  this  appeal 
in  Kant,  who  thus,  with  all  his  intuitionalist  affinities, 
is  not  truly  an  intuitionalist.  (Not,  many  given  first 
principles  of  duty ;  one  principle  :  obey  Reason  !)  Yet 
Kant  is  an  individualist  and  a  rigorist,  though  he 
points  beyond  to  higher  truths — e.g.  it  is  our  own  reason 
we  obey  in  conscience;  therefore  obedience  in  man  is 
free.  We  have  the  appeal  to  reason  again  in  Hegel, 
separated  from  all  individualism,  and  associated  with  a 
high  doctrine  of  the  State  as  the  universal  reason  in  a 
concrete  shape — the  highest  achievement  of  man  and  of 
the  universe. 

Christian  ethics  must  recognise  the  truth  contained 
in  each  several  type  of  ethical  philosophy,  but  it  makes 
its  additions.  There  is  no  intensity  like  that  of  Christ. 
"  Except  your  righteousness  shall  exceed  that  of  the 
rigorists  "  (Matt.  v.  20) — if  in  some  respects  the  Pharisees 
represent  the  laxer  type  of  legalism  (p.  24),  yet  they  im- 


28  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

posed  heavy  burdens.  But  the  same  Christ  says  :  "  My 
yoke  is  easy  "  (Matt.  xi.  30).  So  much  for  individual 
ethics.  Socially,  Christian  ethics  will  not  merge  the 
Kingdom  of  God  in  any  imperfect  earthly  beginnings — 
even  in  higher  beginnings  than  Hegel's  favourite,  the 
Prussian  bureaucratic  State.  But  assuredly  we  must 
set  ourselves  to  follow  after  good  citizenship  as  a 
spiritual  duty.  In  personal  rights  and  pleasures,  in 
benevolence,  in  veracity  and  justice,  in  public  spirit 
and  zeal  for  reform,  in  all  Christian  comradeship,  we 
are  to  serve  God  our  King  and  Father,  and  serving 
Him  to  seek  the  good  of  our  fellows.  The  God  who 
calls  us  to  the  obedience  of  children  is  God  in  Christ. 
And  Christ  stands  for  the  claim  of  Humanity  no  less 
than  for  that  of  the  Most  High. 


CHAPTER   IV 

ETHICS   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT 

The  gospel  of  Christ  stands  in  uniquely  close  connection 
with  the  Old  Testament.  Revelation  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment completes  what  it  had  begun  elsewhere.  This 
holds  good  of  ethics  as  well  as  of  doctrine.  Even 
the  classical  civilisation  of  Greece  and  Rome  has  passed 
on  much  to  Christendom ;  its  philosophies  have  helped 
to  interpret  Bible  teachings  regarding  truth  and  duty : 
but  there  is  no  such  inward  bond  of  union  with  them 
as  that  which  links  Christian  ethics  to  the  Old  Testament. 
Our  Lord  Himself,  St.  Paul,  and  the  whole  Church  have 
been  scrupulously  loyal  to  the  imperfect  yet  sacred  past 
of  God's  revelations. 

We  shall  first  speak  of  the  different  literary  types 
of  Old  Testament  ethic ;  secondly,  we  shall  review  that 
ethic  as  a  whole. 

I.  (1)  Foremost  of  all  must  be  mentioned  the  Ten 
Commandments  (Exod.  xx.  j  Deut.  v.).  Whether  these 
came  literally  through  Moses,  and  so  were  given  very 


30  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

early,  or  whether  they  are  late — a  summary  rather  than  a 
starting-point  of  ethical  revelations  bestowed  on  Israel 
— they  hold  the  supreme  position  within  the  Old  Testa- 
ment by  recognition  of  the  New.  And,  until  Christ 
came,  no  such  summary  of  duty  existed  anywhere ; 
though  there  are  far-away  parallels  in  several  religions, 
e.g.  in  Buddhism.  The  Decalogue  is  purely,  or  almost 
purely,  moral.  Perhaps  the  fourth  1  commandment  is 
an  exception,  although  defenders  of  "the  Sabbath" 
used  vehemently  to  deny  this.  Still,  even  if  Sabbath 
observance  is  something  lower  than  a  moral  duty,  the 
commandment  requiring  it  marks  but  a  small  claim  on 
behalf  of  external  religion  amid  teachings  so  remarkably 
ethical.  There  may  be  limitations  in  the  quality  of 
this  ethic.  The  Decalogue  says,  "  Thou  shalt  not." 
Even  the  fourth  commandment  says  hardly  more  than 
"Thou  shalt  not— work  on  the  Sabbath."  (Only  the 
fifth  commandment  rises  to  positive  duty  with  the 
grand  principle,  "  Honour  thy  father  and  thy  mother.") 
The  seventh  commandment  merely  forbids  acts  of  sin 
against  a  marriage  vow ;  its  letter  does  not  forbid  other 
impure  acts,  still  less  the  movement  of  impure  desire 
which  Christ's  condemnation  scorches.  (Only  the  tenth 
commandment  goes  further  along  this  line;  if  indeed 

1  There  are  different  ways  of  dividing  and  numbering  the  Ten 
Words.  Roman  Catholic  and  Lutheran  books  follow  a  different 
numbering  from  ours. 


ETHICS    OF    OLD    TESTAMENT     31 

"  Thou  shalt  not  covet "  was  the  original  form  of  that 
command  ?  It  is  at  least  the  form  which  has  schooled 
many  ages.)  The  eighth  commandment  protects  the 
rights  of  property  :  "Do  not  steal "  ;  Christ  teaches  duties 
of  property,  duties  of  kindness  :  "  Give — lend  "  (Matt.  v. 
42).  But  the  Decalogue  identifies  religion  with  moral 
duty.     That  is  its  imperishable  glory. 

(2)  Another  contribution  to  the  ethical  training  of  Israel 
was  made  by  the  civil  and  criminal  laws  administered 
in  the  land.  The  "  Book  of  the  Covenant  "  (Exod.  xx.- 
xxiii.)  is  a  good  brief  sample  of  such  legislation.  In  many 
lands,  law  has  helped  to  educate  conscience  and  raise 
the  moral  ideal.  Perhaps  we  are  tempted  to  think  of 
the  advocate  as  a  doubtful  figure  ?  The  thought  of  the 
just  Judge,  a  worthier  emblem  of  jurisprudence,  should 
reassure  us  as  to  law's  helpful  possibilities.  Recently, 
attention  has  been  drawn  to  the  similarities  between  the 
"Book  of  the  Covenant"  and  the  much  more  ancient 
Babylonian  code  of  King  Hammurabi.  In  Babylon,  even 
so  early,  we  see  traces  of  a  more  developed  material 
civilisation;  but  the  Hebrew  code  reveals  finer  sym- 
pathies and  higher  ideals.  Still,  it  is  not  perfect.  "  Eye 
for  eye,  tooth  for  tooth  "  is  a  barbarous  penalty,  and  one 
that  may  mislead  the  individual  conscience  (see  Matt. 
v.  38,  &c,  and  compare  p.  55). 

Other  sections  of  the  Pentateuch  law  have  less  actu- 
ality in  them  than  these  four  chapters.     Exodus  xxxiv. 


32  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

24  paints  a  religious  ideal  in  promising  safety  for  the 
yearly  pilgrimages.  The  law  of  release  had  a  very  hard 
struggle  for  life  (see  Jer.  xxxiv.  9,  &c).  The  various 
Fallow  years  were  perhaps  never  actually  observed.  Still, 
such  laws  were  not  without  their  effect.  We  must  not 
carry  our  modern  business-like  prosaicness  into  the 
ancient  world.  Indian  codes — notably  that  of  Manu — 
exerted  (for  good)  a  strong  religious  authority ;  yet  no 
civil  ruler  enforced  them,  nor  could  they  be  fully  obeyed. 
Why  will  we  not  recognise  similar  influences  in  Israel  ? 

(3)  The  central  Old  Testament  ethic — indeed,  the 
central  stream  of  Old  Testament  revelation — flows 
through  the  prophets.  Their  main  witness  is  this — 
Righteousness  is  what  God  cares  for ;  He  asks  for  nothing 
else.  As  public  teachers,  they  proclaim  a  social  Gospel. 
Wrong  done  by  man  to  man  (i.e.  mainly  by  Israelite  to 
Israelite)  is  what  they  regard  as  calling  down  Heaven's 
vengeance.  Government  and  people  are  summoned  to 
instant  amendment ;  or — sometimes  it  seems  to  be 
taught — amendment  is  too  late ;  judgment  must  fall. 
While  thus  in  one  sense  politicians,  the  prophets  are 
not  practical  opportunist  statesmen.  They  preach  the 
ideal — as  they  know  it — in  all  its  loftiness.  Trust  your 
God  and  serve  Him;  all  must  be  well!  It  dismays 
them  to  see  not  merely  the  political  folly  but  the  re- 
ligious wickedness  of  a  foreign  policy  which  calls  in  this 
or  that  heathen  power  (Isa.  vii. ;  Hos.  vii.   11).     The 


ETHICS    OF    OLD    TESTAMENT     33 

foreign  empire  will  soon  crush  even  the  party  that  calls 
it  in  !     How  much  better  to  trust  God  ! 

(4)  What  theology  calls  the  Ceremonial  Law  repre- 
sents another  element  in  the  life  of  Israel.  There  are 
two  main  points  here,  (a)  Sacrifice.  The  great  prophets 
(Amos  v.  25;  Hos.  vi.  6;  Isa.  i.  n-13:  Jer.  vii.  22) 
and  some  of  the  Psalms  (xl.  6;  1.  8;  li.  16)  almost 
if  not  quite  repudiate  sacrifice,  aiming  at  a  religion 
whose  only  worship  should  be  conduct.  It  is  a  step 
down  from  that  platform  when  the  codified  law  under- 
takes to  regulate  sacrifices.  Men  would  not  cease 
from  temple  worship;  let  them  be  taught  to  do  it 
without  heathenish  or  superstitious  elements  !  Christian 
theology  speaks  of  the  sacrifices  of  Israel  as  "  typical " — 
types  of  Christ's  spiritual  salvation  and  of  the  Christian 
life.  That  is  very  just ;  but  we  have  to  remember  that  Old 
Testament  worshippers  were  not  conscious  of  this.  If 
they  had  seen  that  material  sacrifices  pointed  to  some- 
thing higher  than  themselves,  would  not  these  sacri- 
fices "have  ceased  to  be  offered"?  We  who  have  the 
substance  recognise  the  shadows  to  be  but  shadows 
(Heb.  x.  1).     They  could  not  do  this. 

(b)  In  the  study  of  ethics  we  are  more  concerned 
with  commands  and  prohibitions  in  the  region  of  personal 
custom — "meats  and  drinks  and  divers  washings." 
Some  of  these  had  a  sanitary  value,  but  no  one  would 
know   that    at   the   time.     Other    regulations   guarded 


34  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

against  customs  with  a  heathen  meaning,  e.g.  "  seething 
a  kid  in  its  mother's  milk  "  (probably ;  see  Exod.  xxxiv. 
26  and  elsewhere).  Most  of  them  merely  controlled  and 
fixed  customary  usage.  Now  good  taste  requires  that 
custom  should  ordinarily  be  followed ;  but  it  was  an 
incomplete  type  of  religion  and  of  morals  that  placed 
customs,  even  in  regard  to  indifferent  matters,  in  one  code 
with  righteousness  itself,  and  that  treated  survivals  of 
primitive  "  tabus  "  as  God's  direct  will.  The  gain  as  com- 
pared with  prophecy  was  in  working  efficiency.  Some 
of  the  prophetic  teaching  was  now  made  effective,  but 
much  was  lost. 

(5)  Lastly,  we  name  the  wisdom  teaching  of  Proverbs. 
(Other  Wisdom  writings — Job,  Ecclesiastes,  some  of  the 
Psalms — concern  us  less  in  ethics.  The  Book  of  Ecclesi- 
asticus  in  the  Apocrypha  should,  however,  be  studied.) 
This  teaching  is  addressed  to  individuals  much  more 
than  prophecy  is,  and,  unlike  law,  it  is  definitely  moral 
teaching.  Without  being  particularly  lofty,  it  is  healthy 
and  practical.  It  is  a  thing  of  cool  common  sense ; 
pious,  but  not  enthusiastic.  It  represents  the  shrewd- 
ness of  popular  proverbs,  somewhat  refined  and  elevated 
by  the  revealing  Spirit,  yet  showing  clear  traces  of  its 
origin.  Goodness  pays  ;  sin  never  pays — that  is  its  central 
theme.  Always,  or  almost  always  (Prov.  xii.  28?),  it 
speaks  of  reward  and  punishment  on  earth  (see  xi.  31). 
And  yet,  especially  in  chapters  i.-ix.,  we  meet  with  loftier 


ETHICS    OF    OLD    TESTAMENT    35 

strains.  And  it  is  well  we  should  have  these  utterances 
of  the  wholesome  godly  and  prosperous  Israelite  spirit 
in  the  days  of  its  happiness.  "  Must  every  one  say, 
'Possessing  this,  I  have  pleasure  in  nothing  upon 
earth'  (Ps.  lxxiii.  25)?  Would  it  be  good  to  be  always 
in  this  mood  ?  "  * 

II.  Looking  back  upon  Old  Testament  ethic  as  a 
whole  from  a  New  Testament  standpoint,  we  notice 
some  differences.  (1)  God  is  the  God  of  Israel,  not  of 
all  men.  (2)  Israel,  as  a  given  natural  unity,  is  the  subject 
of  religious  experience.  Probably  the  Ten  Command- 
ments say  "  Thou  "  shalt  not  to  the  people  (the  Fifth  must 
be  an  exception).  The  "  I "  in  the  Psalter  has  often 
been  interpreted  as  the  religious  community.  Again, 
this  made  it  impossible  for  a  doctrine  of  personal 
immortality  to  spring  up  early  in  Israel. — The  doctrine 
of  the  disembodied  spirit's  existence  in  the  place  of  the 
dead  is  common  to  many  races,  and  is  not  allowed  to 
have  any  religious  significance  in  Israel  (Job  iii.  17- 
19;  Ps.  cxv.  17);  else  perhaps  the  dead  would  have 
been  worshipped. — Again,  children  are  thought  of  as 
rewarded  or  punished  with  their  parents  (as  in  the 
Second  Commandment),  and  citizens  with  their  state. 
(3)  So  far  as  the  individual  is  singled  out,  what  is  taught 
is  that  it  shall  be  absolutely  well  with  the  righteous 
and  utterly  ill  with  the  wicked.  In  other  words,  as 
1  Cheyne,y<?3  and  Solomon  (1887),  p.  176. 


36  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

the  moral  element  becomes  more  marked  in  the  religion 
of  Israel,  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  ideal  of  justice,  not 
consciously  upon  love,  which  includes  and  transcends 
justice. 

Yet  the  Old  Testament  itself  does  much  in  the 
way  of  correcting  whatever  is  imperfect  here.  (1)  The 
"stranger,"  as  indeed  under  other  religions,  becomes 
specially  the  client  of  God,  looking  to  spiritual  forces  for 
his  protection.  Besides  which  history  teaches  the  unity 
of  mankind,  and  prophecy  looks  forward  to  a  world- 
wide blessing,  e.g.  Ps.  xxii.  27;  xlviii.  2,  10;  lxxxvi.  9; 
lxxxvii. ;  Isa.  lxi.  11.  At  Isa.  liv.  5  we  even  read,  "God 
of  the  whole  earth  shall  He  be  called."  Everything  is 
definitely  stated  except  the  equality  of  all  men  in  God's 
love,  or  the  possible  examples  set  by  good  Samaritans  ! 

(2)  is  almost  entirely  cleared  away,  in  a  process1  which 
the  present  writer  has  ventured  to  call  "the  evolution  of 
the  individual."  If  on  one  side  we  read  of  Achan's  children 
(Josh.  vii.  24)  and  of  the  wholesale  ban  {e.g.  Deut.  xx. 
16,  17),  or  of  the  sons  of  Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram, 
on  the  other  hand  we  find  a  protest  ascribed  to  Moses 
and  Aaron  in  regard  to  Korah's  neighbours  (Num.  xvi. 
22  ;  a  passage  assigned  by  criticism  to  the  priestly  writer 
P).  It  is  strange  to  read  narratives  which  seem  to  attri- 
bute a  more  delicate  moral  sense  to  Moses  than  to  his 
God !  So  again  in  Num.  xi.  (referred  by  critics  to  J,  E, 
1  Essays  towards  a  New  Theology,  1889;   Essay  II. 


ETHICS    OF    OLD    TESTAMENT    37 

the  more  "prophetic"  historians),  Moses  complains 
downright  of  divine  unfairness.  But  we  know  well  that 
all  human  goodness  is  only  a  shadow  of  God's — a  response 
to  His  touch  in  revelation.  Further,  we  have  David's 
protest  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  17),  and,  above  all,  Abraham's  (Gen. 
xviii.  23,  &c. ;  J  according  to  critics,  but  a  "late  "  section 
or  "  J  Supplement ").  The  historians  preserve  a  tradition 
that,  as  a  law  of  human  procedure,  the  old  practice  of 
slaughtering  a  rebel's  children  was  set  aside  (2  Kings 
xiv.  6)  by  King  Amaziah  "  according  to  the  law  of  Moses," 
i.e.  Deut.  (xxiv.  16).  As  a  law  of  Divine  procedure  it  is 
repudiated  for  the  golden  future  time  by  Jer.  (xxxi. 
2 9)  3°)>  and  very  vehemently,  even  for  the  immediate 
future,  by  Ezek.  (chap,  xviii. ;  also  chap,  xxxii.).  Protests 
like  these  involve,  even  if  they  do  not  assert,  repudiation 
of  such  procedure  as  a  Divine  method  in  the  present  or 
the  past.  The  threatenings  of  the  Second  Command- 
ment, in  their  exact  wording,  have  become  incredible 
to  a  more  enlightened  conscience.  In  Ezekiel,  indeed,  so 
great  emphasis  is  laid  upon  justice  that  we  are  threatened 
with  moral  individualism,  if  not  moral  atomism.  Each 
hour  of  a  man's  life  seems  to  stand  by  itself,  and  the 
whole  past  to  go  for  nothing.  It  remains  for  the  next 
age  to  deal  with  a  further  moral  problem — the  subordina- 
tion of  the  individual — now  that  he  is  clearly  envisaged 
apart  from  family  and  tribe.  He  must  learn  willingly  to 
merge  himself  in  a  larger  life.     Yet,  incomplete  as  it  was, 


38  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

the  disentangling  of  the  individual  was  a  great  moral 
revelation.  It  made  possible  the  slow  but  sure  rise  of 
a  true  doctrine  of  personal  immortality  (or  resurrection). 

The  natural  unity  of  Israel  has  now  almost  trans- 
formed itself  into  a  spiritual  thing;  cf.  Ps.  lxxiii.  i, 
where  "  Israel "  is  explained  as  meaning  "  such  as  are 
of  a  'clean  heart."  Christian  revelation  completes  what 
had  been  so  "  well  begun."  A  true  Jew  is  the  man  who 
is  a  Jew  "  inwardly  "  (Rom.  ii.  29),  and  mercy  belongs  to 
the  world-wide  spiritual  "  Israel  of  God  "  (Gal.  vi.  16). 

(3)  The  morality  of  bare  justice  is  also  in  great  measure 
transcended,  even  within  the  Old  Testament.  There 
are  most  tender  revelations  of  God's  mercy  to  Israel  in 
the  "  honied  rhetoric,"  of  which,  Dr.  Cheyne  formerly 
said,  "  only  Hosea  and  the  writer  of  II.  Isaiah  possess  the 
secret"  (on  Isa.  lvii. ;  1880).  This  is  mercy  to  Israel 
merely ;  still,  it  is  mercy.  Concurrently,  the  sense  of  sin 
in  Israel  grows  deeper  and  deeper.  Isa.  i.  26  passingly, 
Jer.  ii.  2,  3  more  explicitly,  speak  of  halcyon  days  of 
goodness  in  Israel's  remote  past.  The  Pentateuch  his- 
torians (and  the  Psalmists)  rather  leave  the  impression  that 
Israel  went  wrong  from  the  very  first ;  and  in  Ezekiel 
there  is  a  constant  refrain,  "  They  are  a  rebellious  house." 
Indeed,  Ezekiel  thinks  of  Israel's  sinfulness  almost  as 
Christian  dogma  has  thought  of  original  sin  in  the  whole 
of  mankind — one  absolute  blackness.  If  God  blesses 
so  guilty  a  race,  it  is  for   His  own   name's  sake;  to 


ETHICS    OF    OLD    TESTAMENT    39 

let  them  end  miserably  would  discredit  Him.  Or  He 
blesses  them  for  the  sake  of  His  covenant  and  promise, 
or  else  for  their  fathers'  sake.  No  one  thinks  of  saying, 
If  all  are  so  bad,  will  God's  mercy  not  extend  to  all? 
That  inference  is  left  to  be  drawn  by  Paul  the  servant 
of  Jesus  Christ.  How  Christ  Himself  views  a  morality 
of  mere  justice,  we  may  read  in  Matt.  v. 

Some  may  be  surprised  at  our  confessing  the  presence 
of  so  much  imperfection  in  the  Old  Testament ;  and 
some  may  question  how  God  could  begin  by  tolerating 
what  is  morally  imperfect.  Enough  for  us,  perhaps,  to 
recognise  that  that  has  been  God's  way,  and  that  it  has 
given  us  a  revelation  which  does  not  resemble  an  aerolite, 
but  a  living  thing  that  grows.  Truth  springs  "  out  of 
the  earth,"  if  righteousness  "looks  down  from  heaven." 
The  supernatural  naturalised  itself  upon  earth,  and 
when  Christ  came  He  came  unto  His  own.  Has  God 
shown  any  indifference  to  righteousness?     Christ  came.  . 


CHAPTER   V 

PHARISEE   ETHICS 

Between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New  there  lies  a 
gulf,  possibly  not  so  broad  in  span  of  years  as  we  used  to 
think,  but  unquestionably  real  and  deep.  The  dominant 
party  among  the  Jews  of  the  Christian  era  was  that  of  the 
Pharisees.  They  probably  sprang  into  being  in  the  time 
of  Greek-Syrian  persecution,  from  which  deliverance 
came — not  altogether  to  the  satisfaction  of  Pharisees — 
through  the  splendid  Maccabean  revolt.  Doctrinally 
they  connect  with  the  law  and  with  that  tendency  to 
individualism  which  we  noted  above  as  associated 
with  Old  Testament  ideals  of  justice.  But  Pharisees 
supplemented  the  written  law  by  a  man  of  traditions, 
afterwards  codified  in  the  Talmuds.  And  the  individual 
appeal  of  all  these  separate  precepts  was  intensified  by 
the  full  establishment  of  a  doctrine  of  resurrection — 
possibly,  though  not  necessarily,  under  the  inspiration 
of  Persian  beliefs.  Dr.  Forsyth  has  warned  us  against 
"selecting  holiness  as   a  career";   the  Pharisees  were 


PHARISEE    ETHICS  41 

among  the  first  of  men  who  did  this.  They  desired  to 
do  "good  things"  that  they  might  "have  eternal  life" 
(Matt,  xviii.  16)  and  secure  maximum  reward. 

Christ  declares  (Matt,  xxiii.  2)  that  Scribes  and  Pharisees 
"sit  on  Moses'  seat."  There  may  be  a  tinge  of  irony, 
or  the  phrase  may  all  but  over-emphasise  the  merits  of 
Pharisee  teaching  in  order  to  throw  a  more  lurid  light 
upon  Pharisees'  lives.  Yet  at  any  rate,  in  that  phrase 
Christ  accepts  Pharisaism  as  the  form  in  which  the 
religion  of  the  Old  Testament  is  found  genuinely  alive 
in  His  own  day  ;  Sadducees,  who  disclaimed  the  hope  of 
life  after  death,  could  make  no  appeal  to  Him.  And 
between  Sadducees  and  Pharisees  Jewish  thought  practi- 
cally was  divided.  St.  Paul  too,  even  if  we  do  not  press 
the  words  in  which,  for  a  controversial  purpose,  he  is 
reported  to  have  called  himself  a  Pharisee  (Acts  xxiii.  6), 
is  visibly  wedded  to  the  identification  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment— in  the  legal  if  not  in  the  Patriarchal  age — with  its 
Pharisee  interpretation.  (That  is  true,  in  spite  of  the 
seemingly  contradictory  fact  that  St.  Paul  quotes  David 
(Rom.  iv.  6)  as  a  witness  to  genuine,  non-legal,  evangelical 
religion  ;  David,  who  lived  under  the  law  !)  In  a  sense, 
therefore,  Pharisaism  lies  on  the  line  of  development 
towards  Christian  ethics,  although  the  latter  are  a  protest 
more  than  an  outgrowth. 

The  connection  between  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  hinted 
in  Matt,  xxiii.  2  and  in  many  other  Gospel  passages, 


42  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

was  very  close.  Most  of  the  scribes  adhered  to  the 
Pharisee  party.  Sadducee  scribes  were  a  necessity 
of  controversy ;  but  Pharisee  scribes  interpreted  the 
Pentateuch  law,  and  built  up  new  traditions,  with  an 
enthusiasm  wholly  their  own. 

Pharisee  characteristics.  (1)  Immortality  and  resur- 
rection are  a  matter  of  firm  faith  as  nowhere  in  Old 
Testament  ethics.  (2)  A  man's  relation  to  God  depends 
on  his  individual  behaviour.  The  law  did  not  protect 
a  religious  fellowship  bestowed  by  God's  grace  (as  the 
Old  Testament  may  sometimes  teach).  What  God  gave 
at  birth  to  the  Israelite  was  (for  Pharisees)  no  small 
thing;  but  it  was  a  legal  privilege  rather  than  a  gift 
of  grace ;  and  the  Pharisee  must  practically  earn 
salvation   by  good  conduct,   as   if   starting   from  zero. 

(3)  He  might  acquire  merit,  if  he  not  only  reached 
the  standard  set  by  law,  but  surpassed  it  through  such 
exercises    as    fasting,    almsgiving,    works    of    kindness. 

(4)  The  sacrifices  of  the  law,  or  its  many  ceremonial 
restrictions,  had  no  function  beyond  that  of  enabling 
a  pious  man  to  heap  up  merits.  The  good  God  had 
shown  His  goodness  by  instituting  innumerable  com- 
petitions for  experts  in  holiness.  By  showing  his  accu- 
racy in  test  after  test,  the  spiritual  athlete  could  gain 
additional  prizes.  But  in  all  this  moral  activity  the 
Pharisee  revealed  the  temper  of  a  wage-labourer.  He 
was  not  a  son.     His  morality  was  of  the  second  grade. 


PHARISEE    ETHICS  43 

And  when  the  temple — with  its  many  opportunities 
of  ritual  holiness — disappeared,  the  Pharisee  hardly 
missed  it.  Opportunities  enough  were  left  him.  (5) 
Pharisaism  was  a  religion  for  rich  and  learned  men. 
Those  who  had  to  work  hard  for  daily  bread  could  not 
become  dilettante  experts  in  the  details  of  conduct. 
Like  Buddhist  or  like  Catholic  laymen,  the  masses  could 
but  admire  the  good  men  who  specialised  in  holiness. 
(6)  The  scribes  work  hard  at  an  external  casuistical  code, 
with  results  marked  by  Christ's  own  censure.  (7)  Self- 
righteousness  was  not  a  fault,  but  almost  a  central  merit. 
(8)  It  is  fair  to  admit  that,  in  later  days  of  national 
sorrow,  these  experts  in  holiness  regained  love  for 
their  people. 

It  may  clear  our  thoughts  if  we  note  briefly,  first, 
Christ's  direct  criticism;  next,  his  positive  contrasted 
teaching ;  finally,  Paul's  criticisms.  Christ's  direct  cen- 
sures1 are  (1)  a  defiance  of  Pharisee  traditions  as  an 
unwarranted  gloss  upon  God's  word  (Matt.  xv.  1,  &c.  ; 
cf.  xii.  1,  &c.)j  (2)  a  charge  of  externalism  (xxiii. 
5,  25,  26);  (3)  of  confusing  great  with  small  duties  S 
(xxiii.  23,  24);  (4)  of  immoral  sophistication  (xv.  3; 
xxiii.  16-22).2 

The   Pharisee-ridden  generation   heard  with   amaze- 

1  See  further  in  the  present  writer's  Christ  and  the  Jewish  Law 
(1886),  chap.  iii. 

2  Passages  from  Mark  and  Luke  are  often  in  parallelism. 


44  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

ment  Christ's  gospel.  (1)  For  the  anonymous  God— 
the  "  place,"  the  "  name,"  "  heaven,"  or  "  power  " ;  so  a 
mistaken  reverence  almost  always  spoke — Christ  substi- 
tuted the  Father.  (2)  God's  friendship,  therefore,  is  not 
to  be  earned,  but  received  as  a  gift.  And,  in  entering 
on  right  relations  with  Him,  we  enter  on  right  relations 
with  Christ,  with  fellow-Christians,  with  all  men.  (3)  In 
the  presence  of  the  living  God,  the  very  thought  of 
merit  falls  away  (Luke  xvii.  io).  (4)  For  the  mass  of 
external  duties,  Christ  substitutes  one  (Matt.  vii.  12)  or 
two  (xxii.  35-40)  grand  principles  drawn  from  the  Old 
Testament.  Or  He  offers  a  supreme  test  in  saying 
"  Follow  Me,"  or  in  saying  "  Whosoever  will  do  the 
will  of  God  is  My  nearest  kinsman  "  (xii.  50).  (5)  Instead 
of  a  religion  for  the  rich  and  good,  Christ  preaches  a 
gospel  for  the  poor  and  bad.  (6)  Instead  of  a  casuistry 
which  blunts  the  edge  of  moral  requirement,  Christ 
announces  a  lighter  burden  (xi.  31 ;  probably  he  is 
speaking  in  contrast  with  the  scribes)  and  yet  a  severer 
standard  (v.  20).  He  does  not  admit  the  possible 
existence  of  second-rate  Christians.  Salt  that  has  ceased 
to  be  salt  is  good  for  nothing  (v.  13). 

St.  Paul's  handling  of  Pharisaism  is  less  directly  or 
less  simply  ethical  than  the  Master's,  and  has  more 
tendency  to  doctrine.  We  can  trace  in  it  the  spirit  and 
mind  of  Christ,  yet  with  individual  differences  of  state- 
ment.    Intellectually,  it  shows  considerable  agreement 


PHARISEE    ETHICS  45 

with  the  Pharisees  at  its  point  of  departure,  though 
there  is  thorough  antagonism  in  the  conclusions  reached. 

(1)  Paul  construes  religion,  like  the  Pharisees,  not  merely 
in  the  light  of  eternity,  but  in  that  of  future  judgment. 

(2)  He  holds  that  the  law  offers  men  the  bargain 
which  Pharisees  wished  to  accept — starting  as  if  from 
zero,  winning  eternal  life  by  obedience.  (3)  But  he 
holds  that  the  law  insists  on  flawless  obedience,  and 
that  all  mankind  are  enslaved  to  sin.  Therefore  this 
seeming  highway  leads  us  into  the  quagmire,  and  leaves 
us  there  helpless.  Not  complacency  but  despair  is  the 
result  of  a  truly  earnest  effort  to  obey  the  "  spiritual " 
law.  (3a)  The  effect  of  the  law  is  to  show  us  the  need 
of  Atonement,  and  so  shut  us  up  to  the  new  righteous- 
ness bestowed  in  the  gift  of  Christ.  (4)  The  Christian 
is  not  under  the  law,  but  is  led  in  filial  freedom  by  the 
Spirit  of  God ;  and  when  law  disappears  from  his  life, 
casuistry,  its  Pharisee  outgrowth,  disappears  too. 


CHAPTER   VI 

CHRIST'S    ETHICAL   TEACHING 

If  in  Old  Testament  study  we  have  to  keep  in  view 

the  findings  of  criticism,  have  we  to  do  the  same  when 

we    turn    to    the    Gospels?     In  at   least    one    respect 

we  must.     Any  historical  account  of  Christ's  teaching 

must  be  based  not  upon  the  Fourth  Gospel,  but  upon 

the  three  Synoptics.     Though  precious  items  of  fact 

may  come  to  us  through  John  alone,  his  picture  as  a 

whole  is  altered  and  recast.     Within  the  Synoptics  we 

may  take  it  as  proved  that  certain  sections,  common  to 

Matthew  and  Luke,  and  without  exact  parallels  in  Mark, 

come  from  a  primitive  collection  of  Christ's  discourses, 

sometimes  called  by  critics  "  the  Logia "  (because  the 

early  father   Papias   speaks   of   "Matthew"   as    having 

made    "a   record   of   the    Logia"),   and    sometimes  Q 

{Quelle,  source,  or  original  document).     The  Q  sections 

of  the    Gospels  are   obviously   very  valuable    for   our 

purpose.     But  in   this  little  book  it   may  be  enough 

to  base   our   statement   almost   entirely   on   one   such 

46 


CHRIST'S    ETHICAL    TEACHING    47 

section — the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  We  assume  great 
part  of  that  Sermon  to  have  been  delivered  by  our  Lord 
as  a  connected  discourse,  and  to  have  been  included  in 
Q's  record,  though  Luke  has  severely  cut  it  down — 
antiquarian  matter,  or  what  he  considered  as  such, 
having  made  no  appeal  to  that  evangelist.  (We  should 
grant  also  that  the  First  Gospel  has  enlarged  the  Sermon 
by  incorporating  other  teachings  of  Christ's.) 

The  primary  thing  in  all  our  Lord's  messages  is  His 
name  for  God — Father.  Along  with  this  deeper  thought 
of  God  the  name  implies  man's  moral  individuality 
and  immortal  destiny.  Not  merely  is  Israel  or  Israel's 
king,  or  the  greatest  such  king  (the  Messiah)  son 
of  God,  but  the  poorest  and  humblest  believer.  By 
Godlike  acts  we  are  to  become  His  sons  (Matt.  v. 
45) ;  and  those  who  share  God's  nature  are  to  copy 
God's  great  example.  This  is  an  entirely  new  ethical 
motive.  Further,  at  least  in  Matthew,  the  ethical  detail 
of  the  Sermon  is  summed  up  in  the  sublime  and 
searching  words  (v.  48),  "Ye  shall  therefore  be  perfect" 
(Luke  vi.  36,  "merciful")  "even  as  your  Father  which 
is  in  heaven  is  perfect"  (Luke,  "merciful").  Though 
Christ  recognises  that  His  mission  while  on  earth  is 
one  to  Israel,  not  to  Gentiles,  the  fullest  religious  uni- 
versalism  is  implicit  in  the  new  name  for  God.  What 
name  could  possibly  be  higher  ?  or  what  moral  ideal  ? 

Along  with  this  great  revelation,  we  may  take  another 


48  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

characteristic  phrase  of  our  Lord's,  Matt.  vii.  21  :  duty  is 
"doing  the  will"  of  God.  This  "will"  cannot  mean 
casual  or  temporary  precepts,  but  God's  expression  of  His 
own  character  in  the  form  of  Commandments.  As  Father, 
whose  nature  is  love  and  not  mere  justice,  He  summons 
us  to  let  righteousness  ripen  in  ourselves  into  perfect 
love. 

The  relation  of  Christ's  ethics  to  Old  Testament 
teaching  is  not  easily  formulated  in  a  single  phrase.  He 
reverences  the  Old  Testament  as  a  Divine  revelation 
already  bestowed  upon  Israel.  Hence  He  speaks  of  Him- 
self as  not  come  to  "  destroy  "  but  to  "  fulfil "  the  law  and 
the  prophets  (Matt.  v.  17).  His  golden  rule  for  men  is 
recommended  (according  to  Matthew's  more  definite  local 
colour)  as  "  the  law  and  the  prophets  "  in  quintessence 
(vii.  12).  In  the  region  of  institutions,  when  dealing  with 
the  family,  Christ  shows  Himself  almost  anxious  in  His 
loyalty  to  the  Old  Testament,  whether  He  is  repelling 
the  corrosive  influence  of  divorce  by  an  appeal  from 
Deuteronomy  to  Genesis  (Matt.  xix.  4),  or  is  rebuking  the 
casuistry  of  the  Pharisees  regarding  "  Corban  "  by  re- 
asserting the  Fifth  Commandment  ("God  said";  xv.  4). 
We  feel,  and  we  feel  correctly,  that  our  Lord  has  more 
to  convey  to  us  than  a  reiteration  even  of  the  highest 
Old  Testament  teaching  (cf.  p.  56).  The  keynote  of 
His  words,  God's  Fatherhood,  warrants  and  compels 
us  to   hold  fast  this    conviction.     Yet  reverence  leads 


CHRIST'S    ETHICAL    TEACHING 


49 


our  Lord  to  think  by  preference  of  the  highest  elements 
in  the  Old  Testament.  To  Him  it  is  divine.  When 
He  must  condemn,  it  is  a  relief  to  Him  to  find  an 
earlier  Scripture  guaranteeing  higher  truth  (xix.  4) ;  a 
relief  also  to  point  out  that  the  Old  Testament  does  not 
command  but  merely  tolerates  lax  customs  of  divorce 
(xix.  8).  Christ's  teaching  undoubtedly  lays  down  prin- 
ciples which  are  pregnant  with  far-reaching  inferences 
in  the  Church,  in  the  State,  in  society ;  but,  as  to  the 
Old  Testament  institutions  around  Him,  He  declines  to 
formulate  these  inferences.  Even  the  heathen  Roman 
State  is  approved  by  Christ,  if  less  warmly  (xxii.  21). 

The  position  is  altogether  different  when  we  look, 
once  more,  at  Christ's  attitude  towards  the  Pharisees. 
Here  there  is  sharply  emphasised  antagonism.  The 
very  first  words  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  "  Blessed 
are  the  poor  " — Matthew  gives  the  sense  correctly  when  he 
adds  "in  spirit" — may  be  a  challenge  to  the  scribes. 
The  poor  "  people  of  the  land,"  whom  the  Pharisees 
(John  vii.  49)  despised,  are  chosen  by  God.  Similarly 
Matt.  v.  13:  "Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth" — Christ's 
humble  disciples  hold  that  position,  not  the  fine  gentle- 
man practitioners  of  legal  piety.  The  same  note  is 
still  more  emphatically  sounded,  ver.  20  :  "  Except  your 
righteousness  shall  exceed,"  &c.  Here  "  the  righteous- 
ness of  Pharisees  "  means  the  righteousness  they  teach. 
Some  thoughtless  minds  might  suppose  that,  in  setting 

D 


50  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

aside  Pharisee  tradition  (and  Pharisee  legalism),  Christ 
was  repealing  all  requirements  of  morality,  even  to  the 
Old  Testament  law.  He  therefore  makes  it  plain  that 
His  standard  is  higher,  not  lower,  than  that  of  the 
scribes.  Vers.  21-26  enforce  this  in  a  sort  of  parody 
of  the  Pharisee  casuistry.  It  was  never  literally  true, 
nor  could  be,  that  anger  was  a  police-court  matter  and 
contemptuous  words  a  matter  for  the  Jewish  House 
of  Lords — the  Sanhedrim.  Still  less  was  it  exactly  true 
that  the  living  God's  condemnation,  and  the  awful 
sentence  of  hell-fire,  only  came  into  the  reckoning 
after  contempt  had  passed  into  gross  insult  and  invec- 
tive. Between  Jesus  and  the  Pharisees  there  was  entire 
divergence  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament. 
They  saw  above  all  things  laws — definite,  technical, 
narrow :  He  saw  moral  principle  in  all  its  depth  and 
breadth.  When  they  tried  to  supplement  old  laws,  they 
did  so  by  piling  up  other  external  requirements  in  the 
name  of  tradition ;  and  traditions,  though  a  grievous 
burden  in  general,  sometimes  evaded  real  demands  of 
the  law.  He  brought  laws  to  a  single  principle,  or 
turned  plain  maxims  into  startling  paradoxes. 

Historically,  both  ways  of  viewing  the  Old  Testament 
might  have  some  merit.  One  is  the  lawyer's  way ;  only, 
these  lawyers  supposed  law  to  be  fully  adequate  to 
morality.  Christ's  way  is  that  of  a  prophet  and  a  saint, 
or  of  one  who  is  something  more  than  either  !    For  over 


CHRIST'S    ETHICAL    TEACHING     51 

against  faulty  Pharisee  literalism,  or  still  more  faulty 
narrowing  of  the  Old  Testament's  letter,  Christ  does  not 
merely  hold  up  the  true  meaning  and  inner  spirit  of 
the  Old  Testament.  In  dealing  with  principles  (as 
contrasted  with  institutions)  Christ  uses  His  authority 
to  the  full :  "  I  say  unto  you."  The  "  hypocrites,"  whose 
religious  ostentation  is  condemned  in  vi.  1-18,  were  no 
doubt  to  be  found  among  the  Pharisees  {cf.  Matt, 
xxiii.).  Theirs  was  the  general  type;  though  not  all 
Pharisees  need  have  been  thus  guilty. 

Perhaps  the  most  important  of  all  the  watchwords 
which  Christ  employs  in  His  ethical  teaching  is  "the 
kingdom  of  God."  In  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
Matthew  gives  it  four  times  over  (v.  3,  10,  20;  vii.  21 ; 
Luke  characteristically  has  it  only  once — vi.  20).  Evi- 
dently the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  that  great  manifesto 
of  Christ's,  defines  the  requirements  for  admission  to 
the  future  kingdom. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  remind  the  reader  that  the 
expression  kingdom  of  God  is  found  everywhere  in  the 
Synoptics  (in  John,  only  iii.  3,  5 ;  or  approximately  at 
xviii.  36),  and  that  modern  study  of  Christian  ethics  has 
made  large  use  of  Christ's  "  kingdom  "  teaching. 

Kingdom  of  God,  like  so  much  besides,  meets  us  for 
the  first  time  in  Second  Isaiah  (not  quite  verbally ;  lii. 
7 ;  cf.  ver.  10).  Next  we  have  it  in  the  interesting 
group    of   Psalms    sometimes    called   the    "Accession 


52  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

Psalms "  (xlvii.,  xciii.,  xcvi.-xcix.).  "Thy  God  reigneth  " 
or  "  the  Lord  reigneth  "  is,  in  a  loftier  region,  an  assertion 
similar  to  "Jehu  reigneth"  (II.  Kings  ix.  13,  Hebrew). 
It  does  not  refer  to  the  permanent  truth  of  God's 
supremacy,  but  to  a  very  special  redemptive  manifesta- 
tion, when,  as  it  were,  God  thrusts  aside  all  imperfect 
delegates,  takes  the  reigns  into  His  own  hands,  and 
"judges"  {i.e.  governs)  justly.  The  great  events,  which 
prophets  or  psalmists  had  hailed  as  the  beginning  of 
the  happy  end,  had  all  proved  less  than  that — mere 
types  of  a  final  redemption  which  must  still  be  waited 
for;  but  the  hope  itself  smouldered  on  and  flamed  up 
anew.  In  contrast  with  brute-like  heathen  empires 
(vii.  3,  &c),  the  book  of  Daniel  looks  forward  to  a 
humane  "kingdom"  (ver.  13),  when  the  "saints  of  the 
Most  High"  (ver.  18)  are  to  be  supreme. 

It  may  be  observed  that  the  prophecies  we  have 
quoted  say  nothing  about  a  Messiah.  Their  hope  is 
that  God  will  come  Himself  to  redeem  and  to  reign. 
Such  a  hope  is  one  well-marked  line  of  Old  Testament 
expectation — but  it  was  not  difficult  to  modify  the 
simple  hope  of  God's  reign  by  reviving  the  thought  of 
Messiah  (promised  e.g.  in  Isa.  ix.),  as  the  Being  through 
whom  God's  power  should  be  exercised.  The  message 
now  is — others  have  failed;  the  true  Son  of  God  will 
gloriously  succeed.  Daniel's  "Son  of  Man"  (vii.  13), 
though  probably  meant  as  a  symbol  of  the  "saints" 


CHRIST'S    ETHICAL   TEACHING     53 

(vii.  18),  could  readily  be  interpreted  as  the  description 
of  a  personal  Messiah;  and  the  latter  hope  was  keen 
and  strong  in  Christ's  time.  His  forerunner  the  Baptist 
not  merely  preached  the  coming  kingdom,  but  spoke  of 
the  ."coming  One"  (Matt.  iii.  11;  xi.  3),  mightier  than 
himself,  who  was  to  save  saints  and  judge  sinners.  At 
this  point  Christ  the  Messiah  begins  :  "  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  at  hand"  (iv.  17).  ["Kingdom  of  heaven" 
is  simply  another  phrase  for  "  kingdom  of  God."] 

It  is  easy  to  make  a  Christian  doctrine  out  of  this. 
In  and  with  the  true  King,  Jesus  Christ,  God's  kingdom 
came  to  mankind.  Or  else,  in  proportion  as  the  rule 
of  God  in  Christ  is  willingly  accepted  by  men's  hearts, 
the  kingdom  comes.  These  are  legitimate  and  helpful 
forms  of  Christian  thought;  but  we  must  not  too  con- 
fidently assume  that  Christ's  words  were  understood 
in  that  precise  sense  by  those  who  first  heard  them. 
The  Gospels  of  Mark  (i.  n)  and  Luke  (iii.  22)  tell  us 
that  Christ  was  conscious  from  His  baptism  onwards  of 
being  the  Messiah.  At  the  Temptation — we  may  well 
infer — He  readjusted  His  future  to  this  amazing  discovery. 
Henceforward  He  taught  men  and  healed  the  sick ;  but 
properly  royal  functions  He  did  not  yet  discharge.  For 
He  waited:  on  one  side,  perhaps,  till  Israel  should 
believe  in  Him;  but  mainly  till  the  Father  should 
publicly  crown  Him.  In  the  end,  through  Israel's  dis- 
belief, it  proved  to  be  the  Father's  will  that  He  should 


54  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

pass  by  the  cross  to  His  glory.  He  then  announces 
kingship  and  judgeship  as  belonging  to  an  awful  future 
when — in  some  sense — He  shall  come  "  in  the  clouds  " 
(Matt.  xvi.  27  ;  xxvi.  64).  It  makes  a  vast  difference,  no 
doubt,  that  mankind  has  had  the  Messiah  personally 
present  in  human  life.  Not  a  few  Synoptic  records  of 
our  Lord's  own  words  speak  of  the  kingdom  as  already 
in  being  {e.g.  xii.  28).  But  the  formal  proclamation 
stands.  The  kingdom  is  coming  !  It  is  near  !  And 
formally  Christ's  moral  teaching  expounds  the  conditions 
required  for  entrance  into  the  kingdom — when  it  comes 
(see  p.  51). 

Another  of  our  Lord's  watchwords,  especially  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  is  "righteousness."  His  root 
controversy  with  the  Pharisees  regarding  ethics  turns 
on  the  question — What  is  righteousness?  Simple  wor- 
shippers "  had  heard  " — from  scribes,  in  synagogues ; 
when  engaged  in  controversy  with  educated  scribes 
Christ  says  "  Have  ye  never  read  ?  "  (xxi.  16,  42  ;  xxii.  31) 
— one  view  of  what  was  said  "to  them  of  old  time." 
Scribes  sat  "on  Moses'  seat,"  and  their  teaching  is 
viewed  as  inadequate  rather  than  false  (cf.  p.  41). 
Christ  demands  a  right  inner  motive  (v.  22,  28). 
Of  course,  mere  good  intention  divorced  from  conduct 
counts  for  nothing  (vii.  17,  18);  yet,  on  the  other 
hand,  no  act  is  morally  good  unless  the  motive  is  right. 
Further,  the  righteousness  Christ  demands  is  humane. 


CHRIST'S    ETHICAL    TEACHING     55 

He  thinks  more  of  man's  debt  to  man  than  of  ritual 
(v.  23).  So,  too,  the  testing  Commandments  are 
..hose  of  the  Second  Table  (xix.  18).  Or  if  love  to  God 
is  the  first  and  great  Commandment,  there  is  "  a  second 
like  it" — love  to  man  (xxii.  36-40).  We  have  some- 
thing which  is  more  nearly  a  supersession  of  the  Old 
Testament  in  regard  to  oaths  (v.  33-37)-  The  religious 
use  of  vows  had  given  rise  to  oaths  in  ordinary  speech. 
The  Old  Testament  simply  insisted  that  men  should 
stand  to  their  word.  Christ  condemns  the  whole 
system ;  partly  because  He  can  think  of  no  object  which 
is  so  undivine  that  it  may  fitly  be  used  as  a  thing  to 
swear  by,  partly  because  of  His  habitual  reverence  for 
truth.  If  God  is  everywhere — if  truthfulness  is  every- 
thing— occasional  special  reasons  for  being  truthful  are 
out  of  place.  Yet  in  the  region  of  institutions  Christ 
submits  to  be  "  adjured  "  by  the  high  priest  (xxvi.  63). 
"  Only  an  eye  for  an  eye  " — a  limit  set  to  revenge — is 
swept  away  (v.  38-42),  though  an  Old  Testament  saying. 
Christ  disallows  it,  not  merely  as  a  savage  punish- 
ment— He  says  nothing  about  that — but  as  a  maxim  of 
private  conduct.  In  moving  intense  phrases  He  calls 
for  the  greatest  possible  goodwill  even  towards  those 
who  wrong  us.  "Love  your  enemies"  (v.  43-48) 
visibly  supersedes  an  imperfect  Old  Testament  law. 
This  is  the  highest  possible  demand.  It  leads  up 
naturally  to  a  "  Ye  shall  be  perfect "  (ver.  48  ;  see  p.  47). 


56  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

If  the  "  righteousness "  of  outward  worship  is  to  be 
spoken  of  at  all  (vi.  i),  the  lesson  runs  :  Be  conscious  of 
God  and  God  alone  (vers.  3,  6,  18).  What  is  done  as 
to  God  counts ;  nothing  else  counts.  If  any  other 
calculation  intrudes,  the  righteousness  becomes  un- 
righteous and  the  religion  irreligious. 

The  last  thing  we  have  to  notice  in  Christ's  teaching 
is  His  own  place  of  authority.  Though  he  repudiates 
mere  lip-homage  to  His  lordship  (vii.  21),  and  might  be 
understood,  however  erroneously,  as  disclaiming  Messiah- 
ship,  He  exacts  absolute  obedience  (v.  22,  28,  32,  34, 
39,  44).  "These  words  of  mine"  (vii.  24)  rank  as 
equivalent  to  "the  will  of  God"  (vii.  21).  Christ's 
sayings  are  the  final  revelation  of  God's  will.  Thus, 
speaking  in  Israel  and  addressing  personal  disciples — 
who  were  loyal,  yet  had  but  dim  ideas  of  the  Master's 
true  dignity — He  speaks  to  mankind.  The  ethic  of 
conformity  to  God's  character  and  of  loyalty  to  man  is 
recognised  by  the  enlightened  and  unspoiled  conscience 
as  the  last  word  in  regard  to  the  principles  of  duty.  As 
time  went  on,  and  Christ's  destiny  of  suffering  grew 
plainer,  His  demand  for  sacrifice  as  the  part  of  all  dis- 
ciples became  plainer  too.  While  He  lived  on  earth, 
"  following  Christ "  may  have  meant  chiefly  joining  the 
apostle  pilgrims.  Not  every  disciple  was  invited  to 
do  this,  or  could  be.  But,  once  Christ  is  glorified, 
"following  Him"  means  following  His  example  as  our 


CHRIST'S    ETHICAL    TEACHING     57 

forerunner  through  sufferings  in  that  Godward,  home- 
ward, heavenward  way  which  His  grace  (xx.  28 ;  xxvi. 
28)  opens  to  us.  His  life  illustrated  to  the  last  syllable 
the  principles  He  taught.  Greater  love  hath  no  one 
than  was  shown  by  this  sinless  burden-bearer. 

Christ  gives  us  principles.  Or,  when  He  speaks 
practically  He  gives  us  paradoxes,  whose  shell  we  must 
break  in  order  to  extract  the  kernel.  He  was  no  law- 
giver. Many  moderns  call  the  ethic  of  Jesus  "  enthu- 
siastic" (cf.  p.  60).  Some  at  least  mean  by  this  term 
that  the  Master's  teaching  was  impracticable — a  morality 
for  men  who  thought  the  end  of  the  world  imminent ; 
not  for  men  living  and  working  in  society.  That  is  to 
treat  Christ  as  a  literalist  and  law-giver !  Is  not  the 
truth  rather  that  Christ's  wisdom  is  timeless  ?  He,  who 
taught  us  to  love  and  serve  God  in  loving  and  serving 
men,  did  not  forget  the  real  world  for  the  sake  of  any 
supernatural  future.  He  sets  before  us  the  sober  facts 
of  our  position,  if  glorified  in  the  light  of  God's  Father- 
hood and  Christ's  Lordship — if  made  more  than  ever 
sacred  by  the  solemnities  of  judgment  and  by  the 
nearness  of  heaven. 


CHAPTER  VII 

ETHICAL  TEACHING  IN   THE   EPISTLES 

(1)  The  first  great  feature  to  be  noted  here  is  the  cen- 
tral place  held  by  our  Lord  and  His  work.  That  is  the 
advance  made  by  the  Epistles  as  compared  even  with  the 
Gospels,  i.e.  with  the  Synoptics ;  it  must  be  recognised 
that  the  peculiar  splendour  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  due 
to  the  fashion  in  which,  whether  it  deals  with  the  Master's 
words  or  His  deeds,  it  allows  the  glory  of  His  exaltation 
to  shine  through  the  records  of  humiliation  and  suffering. 
Only  one  New  Testament  book — the  Epistle  of  James — 
says  nothing  regarding  the  atoning  significance  of  the 
sufferings  of  Christ.  Everywhere  else,  notably  in  Revela- 
tion, the  new  motives  for  ethic  which  arise  from  the  know- 
ledge of  Christ's  dying  love  assert  themselves  as  power- 
fully as  the  revelation  of  Fatherhood  does  in  Christ's  own 
discourses.  What  was  with  the  Master  a  prophetic  hint 
(p.  57)  becomes  an  open  gospel  to  His  apostles. 

(2)  Next  we  must  notice  the  precise  sharply  defined 
audience  of  apostolic  teaching.     The  little  churches  are 

53 


THE    EPISTLES  59 

addressed.  Usually  they  are  made  up  of  converts  from 
heathenism  ;  there  may  have  been  a  fight  to  save  the 
Mother  Church  of  Jewish  believers  from  sinking  back 
unintentionally  into  Judaism.  The  life  of  the  churches, 
cut  off  as  they  are  from  national  sympathies,  either 
Jewish  or  Gentile,  is  narrow — if  we  like  to  call  it  so — 
but  it  is  intense.  There  is  no  danger  of  excessive 
individualism  {here;  they  live  in  and  for  each  other, 
"honouring"  fellow-men  outside,  but  "loving  the  brother- 
hood "  (I.  Pet.  ii.  17).  St.  Paul's  most  systematic  epistle, 
that  to  the  Romans,  introduces  the  moral  duties  of 
Christians  (xii.  6)  as  a  phase  of  their  spiritual  responsi- 
bility for  one  another.  In  the  organism  whose  "  head," 
or  rather,  here,  whose  unity,  is  Christ,  each  member  has 
his  part  to  play.  And,  besides  the  more  showy  gifts  of 
inspired  teaching  or  guidance,  gifts  of  loving  service 
are  called  for  and  are  sacred.  Thus  the  little  local 
church  is  transfigured  by  the  thought  that  it  repre- 
sents, for  the  local  believers,  the  whole  glorious  Church 
of  the  Lord  Jesus. 

(3)  The  moral  life  thus  regulated  is  thought  of  as 
having  but  a  short  space  of  time  allotted  to  it  in  God's 
decree.  Almost  the  whole  New  Testament  is  dominated 
by  the  thought  of  Christ's  speedy  Return.  The  churches 
looked  back  to  Christ's  earthly  life  and  work ;  they 
looked  up  to  His  present  though  unseen  help ;  but  they 
also  looked  forward  with  strained  eager  faith   to  His 


60  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

reappearance.  I.  Tim.  vi.  15  seems  to  throw  the  Advent 
into  the  background,  and  some  of  the  shorter  epistles 
do  not  mention  it ;  but  the  general  tone  is  unmistakable. 
As  a  whole,  the  New  Testament  is  alive  with  that 
solemn  hope. 

On  this  point,  then,  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 
speak  with  lessened  authority  to  us  ;  for  we  have  learned 
from  events  that  it  was  not  God's  will  to  fulfil  that 
expectation  as  the  first  Christians  conceived  it.  Yet 
the  purity  and  solemnity  of  New  Testament  ethic  owe 
much  to  this  sense  of  the  Master's  nearness.  And  for 
these  qualities  our  debt  is  immense. 

(4)  During  the  short  period  of  waiting,  the  churches, 
considered  as  being  alive  "in  Christ,"  are  self-sufficient. 
The  members,  with  but  scanty  help  from  church  office- 
bearers, are  to  edify  one  another ;  if  need  be,  to  disci- 
pline one  another.  This  external  formlessness — this  re- 
liance upon  spiritual  life  within  and  upon  the  spiritual 
gifts  of  the  members  as  a  whole — is  described  by  some 
as  entering  into  the  early  Christian  "enthusiasm"  (p. 
57).  Doctrinally,  the  spiritual  gifts  are  interpreted  with 
growing  clearness  as  due  to  the  working  of  the  one 
great  Spirit  of  God.  St.  Paul  especially  {cf.  p.  45) 
teaches  this  truth.  In  I.  John,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  thought  of  as  giving  religious  certainty, 
but  is  not  directly  regarded  as  constituting  the  new 
moral  life.     Christ's  command,  Christ's  example,  Christ's 


THE    EPISTLES  61 

redemption,  God's  begetting,  are  sources  of  life;  the 
Spirit  imparts  knowledge  and  assurance.  But  if  in  the 
near  future  extraordinary  gifts  were  to  drop  away,  it  was 
of  great  value  for  Christianity  to  have  the  abiding 
thing  of  Christian  service,  as  well  as  faith  itself,  marked 
as  "  spiritual "  and  as  evincing  God's  presence.  Where 
the  Spirit  of  God  is,  there  is  guidance — without  law; 
before  the  New  Testament  is  collected ;  before  any 
denned  organisation  is  required  in  the  churches. 

(5)  Yet  a  beginning  of  more  external  authority  comes 
soon  in  the  recognition  of  the  supremacy,  for  all  ethical 
questions,  of  Christ's  teaching.  It  is  possible  that  the 
early  collection  of  Christ's  discourses  (Q — see  p.  46), 
with  its  limitations  (probably,  e.g.,  it  contained  no  account 
of  the  Passion),  was  connected  with  the  practical  needs 
of  the  churches.  Even  St.  Paul,  who  scarcely  refers  to 
the  days  of  our  Lord's  flesh  apart  from  the  culminating 
sacrifice  of  the  cross,  appeals  to  the  Master's  words  as  a 
final  moral  authority.  No  epistle  gives  us  such  an  inside 
view  of  early  Christian  churches  as  I.  Corinthians ;  and 
I.  Cor.  vii.  reveals  four  different  kinds  or  degrees  of 
authority — Christ's  command  (ver.  10),  Paul's  command 
(vers.  12-17),  Paul's  permission  (ver.  6),  Paul's  advice 
(ver.  25).  All  these,  even  the  last,  claim  very  real 
authority.  St.  Paul  has  no  hesitation  about  asserting 
his  God-given  rights.  So  long  as  he  and  the  Twelve 
lived,  there  was  another  check  upon  error  in  the  churches 


62  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

besides  the  recollection  of  Christ's  words.  And  yet  the 
words  of  Christ  are  manifestly  given  the  supreme  all- 
commanding  place. 

(6)  Was  the  Old  Testament  similarly  authoritative? 
Religiously  it  was — and  rightly  so.  It  was  a  sacred  book, 
the  Bible  of  the  earliest  Christian  church.  But  could 
Christians  literally  follow  its  detailed  ethical  (and  cere- 
monial) injunctions  ?  As  long  as  the  battle  regarding 
the  law  was  remembered — or,  perhaps,  as  long  as  sac- 
rifices were  offered  at  Jerusalem — or,  perhaps,  as  long 
as  the  churches  were  conscious  of  Jewish  rivalry — there 
was  little  fear  that  the  Old  Testament  law  would  unduly 
affect  Christian  life.  It  may  be  that  even  to  St.  Paul  the 
Decalogue  occupied  a  place  apart ;  he  quotes  those 
commands  which  are  summed  up  in  love  to  man  (Rom. 
xiii.  8-10;  cf.  Gal.  v.  13,  14,  and  Christ's  own  words 
Matt.  xix.  18  as  well  as  xxii.  36,  &c).  But  on  the  whole 
St.  Paul's  teaching  remains  clear — that  law  is  dead  and 
done  with,  and  that  the  Spirit  reigns  in  its  stead.  When 
I.  John  iii.  4  refers  to  sin  as  "  lawlessness  "  (R.  V.),  the  law 
"  transgressed  "  (A.V.)  is  rather  the  abstraction  "  moral 
law  "  than  either  the  Decalogue  or  the  Pentateuch.  And 
it  is  only  indirectly  hinted  at  (the  meaning  probably  is 
that,  in  the  strange  new  life  of  Christian  faith,  simple 
moral  distinctions  are  to  stand),  and  even  so  the  refer- 
ence is  solitary.  One  New  Testament  book  has  a 
thoroughly  legal  outlook,  the  Epistle  of  James.     Yet 


THE    EPISTLES  63 

even  in  it  we  have  a  "perfect  law  of  liberty"  (i.  15), 
vivified  and  made  glorious  by  the  Master's  teaching,  whose 
very  words  echo  again  and  again  in  the  Epistle.  The 
proper  use  of  the  Old  Testament,  especially  as  to  morals, 
was  a  problem  of  no  small  difficulty  which  the  later  church 
had  to  face  for  itself.  St.  Paul,  even  St.  Paul,  had  once 
appealed  to  the  law  allegorically  (I.  Cor.  ix.  9),  and  once 
(xiv.  34;  but  some  have  supposed  the  passage  to  be 
an  early  gloss  and  not  St.  Paul's  own)  literally.  A  few 
generations  later,  Old  Testament  precedents  came  in 
with  a  flood  in  support  of  the  claims  of  an  official 
Christian  priesthood.  Apostolic  writings  are  not  re- 
sponsible for  that.  The  most  we  can  concede  is  that 
their  silence  gave  opportunity  to  the  error,  when  it  arose. 

(7)  Within  the  New  Testament  itself  we  can  trace  the 
beginnings — varyingly  in  varying  regions — of  church 
office-bearers.  As  the  early  wandering  preachers,  died, 
leaving  fewer  and  fewer  successors — as  the  spiritual 
enthusiasm,  which  kept  alive  a  ministry  of  mutual 
edification,  lessened — the  importance  of  the  local  church 
office-bearers  increased.  It  was  a  natural  and  not  un- 
healthy change  ;  but  it  brought  with  it  great  dangers — 
priesthood,  hierarchy. 

(8)  What  then  is,  in  outline  or  in  sample,  the  char- 
acter of  the  ethic  inculcated  in  the  epistles  ?  Sometimes 
we  are  surprised  at  the  emphasis  laid  upon  elementary 
moral  decency.     That  is  a  reminder  that  the  churches 


64  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

were  composed  of  converts  from  heathenism  and  lived 
in  the  midst  of  a  heathen  environment.  Another  tchar- 
acteristic  is  the  emphasis  upon  hospitality.  The  tie  of 
brotherhood  had  to  be  sacred  (e.g.  Heb.  xiii.  2),  especi- 
ally while  the  ministry  of  the  apostles  and  wandering 
preachers  lasted.  But  as  speculation  grew  bolder  and 
heresies  arose  {e.g.  II.  John  10),  the  churches  had  to  feel 
after  more  definite  guarantees  of  Christian  orthodoxy,  and 
found  them  {e.g.  III.  John  9,  Diotrephes  ?)  in  the  "  mon- 
archical "  Episcopate  (the  one-man  Bishop).  On  the 
whole,  we  see  Christ's  teaching  faithfully  remembered. 
James  is  no  less  loyal  than  Paul  (see  p.  62)  to  the 
supremacy  of  the  "royal  law"  (James  ii.  8).  It  has 
been  remarked  that  "  love  your  enemies  "  (Matt.  v.  44 ; 
see  p.  55)  tends  to  shrink  into  "Love  one  another"  or 
"  love  the  brotherhood  "  (I.  Pet.  ii.  17  ;  see  p.  59).  The 
immediate  task  of  the  churches  was  to  develop  a  warm 
and  loving  life  indoors.  If  the  Master  might  confine 
Himself  (p.  57)  to  stating  the  ideal  in  its  absoluteness, 
apostles  had  to  study  practical  means  of  fulfilling  it. 
Yet  the  moral  advance  is  maintained ;  St.  Paul  (Rom.  xii. 
14)  and  St.  Peter  (I.  Pet.  ii.  23;  iii.  15)  both  bid  us 
"  bless  and  curse  not "  even  the  persecutor.  Again,  both 
inculcate  loyalty  to  the  Roman  empire  (Rom.  xiii.  1,  &c, 
expanding  Matt.  xxii.  21;  cf.  p.  49  and  I.  Pet.  ii. 
17).  St.  Paul  wrote  in  the  golden  early  days  of  Nero's 
reign,  and  St.  Peter — as  Sir  Wm.  Ramsay  has  pointed 


THE    EPISTLES  65 

out — when  persecution  was  imminent  but  not  yet  actual. 
The  book  of  Revelation  in  the  midst  of  persecution 
disowns  the  drunken  harlot  city  (xvii.  5);  there  is  great 
danger  of  losing,  along  with  civil  loyalty,  the  very  spirit 
of  Christian  love  itself.  But  the  temptation  was  terrible. 
In  the  acceptance  of  slavery  (cf.  Col.  iii.  22  ;  one  of 
the  family  relationships  is  slave-and-master)  we  see  the 
practicalness  of  Christian  apostles.  They  dared  not 
provoke  a  servile  rising.  Besides,  the  Lord  was  at  hand. 
In  their  martyr  constancy  we  see  the  idealism  which 
they  had  learned  of  Christ  (cf.  I.  John  v.  5). 


CHAPTER   VIII 

ETHICAL   IDEAS   OF   CATHOLICISM 

This  is  again  a  very  large  subject  to  handle  in  brief  out- 
line, covering,  as  it  does,  a  period  quite  as  long  as  that  of 
the  Old  Testament.  Yet,  throughout  the  whole  many- 
sided  development,  we  can  recognise  a  single  well- 
marked  type  which  may  conveniently  be  described  as 
"  Catholicism."  For,  from  about  the  time  when  em- 
phasis begins  to  be  laid  upon  "Catholic"  or  universal 
agreement  in  a  "  Catholic  "  or  world-wide  Church,  certain 
theories  of  the  Christian  life  begin  to  be  strongly  marked. 
The  Catholic  type  of  Christianity  involves  an  equal 
emphasis  upon  three  different  things — dogma,  sacra- 
ments, law.  It  is  with  the  last  that  we  are  most 
concerned. 

The  first  contrast  with  the  apostolic  churches  is  the 
receding  of  the  eschatological  hope.  Christ's  return 
is  conceived  as  certain,  but  remote.  Concurrently  the 
ministry  of  spiritual  gifts  is  suppressed  in  favour  of  a 
ministry  of  sacramental  office.  This  great  change  did 
not  happen  all  at  once.     In  a  sense  it  is  still  incom- 

66 


ETHICS    OF    CATHOLICISM       67 

plete  !  Official  order  in  the  Catholic  Church  has  had  to 
fight  against  rival  after  rival — first  the  prophets ;  then  the 
confessors  in  times  of  persecution ;  finally,  the  monks. 
Priests  or  "  secular  clergy,"  with  their  chiefs  the  bishops, 
are  even  now  habitually  jealous  of  the  half-independent 
"regular"  clergy — i.e.  the  ascetics  under  a  special 
"rule"  of  life,  answerable  to  their  own  chiefs  or  to 
Rome.  But  these  are  later  developments.  Catholicism 
came  to  the  birth  when  Church  order  superseded  the 
ministry  of  spiritual  gifts,  and  treated  Christianity 
definitely  as  a  new  law. 

Along  with  law  there  came  much  talk  of  merit. 
Still  more  definitely  than  Phariseeism — not  probably 
by  borrowing  from  Pharisaic  Judaism,  as  the  Tubingen 
school  supposed ;  rather  by  quite  unconscious  imitation, 
out-Pharfseeing  the  Pharisees — the  Church  sharply  dis- 
tinguished what  fell  below  the  standard  of  law  (sin) ; 
what  just  satisfied  it  (and  so  is  lawful  and  permissible) ; 
and  what  "  supererogatorily  "  went  beyond,  acquiring 
merit.  Merit  is  chiefly  seen  in  the  ascetics.  Their  extra 
goodness  is  a  treasure — accessory  to  the  "merits"  of 
Christ — which  the  Church  can  dispense  in  relieving 
sinners  from  some  of  the  evil  consequences  of  sin.  But 
this  secondary  moral  conception  of  merit  is  applied 
everywhere.  If  it  is  carried  up  to  Christ,  whose 
"merits"  save  the  world,  it  is  carried  down  to  the 
humblest  and  vilest  that  obtain  mercy;    each  must — 


68  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

always  in  dependence  first  on  Christ,  then  on  the 
Church ;  yet  each  must  in  some  sense — merit  his  own 
salvation.  The  teaching  is  practical  and  definite ;  but 
what  a  gulf  separates  it  from  the  Gospels  and  Epistles ! 

One  effect  of  the  Catholic  standpoint  is  as  follows  : 
In  the  teaching  of  Christ  there  is  an  extraordinary 
combination  of  gentleness  and  sternness.  It  is  the 
Christian  Church's  hardest  task  to  be  loyal  to  these  two 
voices — as  they  may  seem.  Catholicism  separates  the 
two.  The  first-rate  Christian  follows  a  way  of  his  own, 
responding  to  the  severity  of  Christ's  appeal.  The 
average  Christian  sinks  into  second-rateness,  availing 
himself  of  the  mercifulness  of  the  Gospel.  To  the 
ascetic,  then,  the  Divine  voice  addresses  "  counsels  of 
perfection" — a  conception  arrived  at  by  combining 
I.  Cor.  vii.  25  with  Matt.  xix.  21.  (Some  may  hflld  it  pos- 
sible that  the  wording  of  Matt.  xix.  21 — there  is  nothing 
similar  at  Mark  x.  21  or  Luke  xviii.  22 — shows  this  dis- 
tinction already  at  work.  On  the  other  hand,  Matt.  v. 
48  requires  "  perfection "  of  all.  I.  Cor.  vii.  unques- 
tionably prefers  celibacy  to  marriage ;  but  it  is  a  daring 
thing  to  interpret  St.  Paul's  personal  advice  as  advice  pro- 
ceeding from  God  Himself.)  In  course  of  time,  the  virtues 
of  the  Christian  ascetic  were  defined  as  poverty,  chastity 
and  obedience.  Long  before  Christian  monasticism, 
there  had  been  similar  phenomena  in  Eastern  religions, 
especially  Buddhism.     But  here  again  it  is  improbable 


ETHICS    OF    CATHOLICISM       69 

that  the  earlier  phenomena  had  any  direct  influence  on 
Catholicism.  Twice  over,  independently,  all  civilised 
society  is  disparaged  or  condemned. 

Poverty  may  appeal  to  the  poor  life  of  Christ;  in 
later  times  {e.g.  Francis  of  Assisi)  it  does  so.  But  for 
centuries  there  is  no  great  emphasis  on  direct  imitation 
of  the  Master.  When  chastity  or  celibacy  is  praised, 
imitation  of  the  angels  (Matt.  xxii.  30 ;  but  see  Matt.  vi. 
10;  Ps.  ciii.  20!)  is  emphasised.  Celibacy,  of  course, 
is  oriental  too.  The  third  virtue,  Obedience,  is  quite 
alien  to  primitive  Buddhism.  It  is  perhaps  equally 
alien  to  the  earliest  form  of  Christian  monasticism. 
The  first  Christian  ascetics  were  solitaries,  living  in  the 
rainless  and  healthy  Egyptian  climate.  It  was  a  triumph, 
partly  for  the  social  instincts  of  mankind,  partly  for  wise 
Church  rule,  when  the  solitaries  were  followed  into  their 
deserts,  grouped  into  fellowships,  brought  under  control 
of  the  most  iron  kind.  If  on  one  view  monasticism 
represents  the  anti- social  principle,  on  another  view  it 
represents  that  principle  tamed,  mastered  by  the  Christian 
society,  and  set  to  work.  For  if  the  Eastern  Church 
generally  is  loyal  to  the  original  contemplative  type  of 
monasticism,  Western  Catholicism  has  more  and  more 
used  the  Regulars  in  the  interests  of  social  service  and 
Church  rule. 

In  both  halves  of  the  Catholic  world  this  type  of  life 
— partially,  but  only  partially,  imitated  in  the  celibacy  of 


70  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

the  Western  (secular)  clergy — becomes  the  standard  of 
earnest  Christian  living.  Are  you  profoundly  zealous 
for  salvation  ?  Become  a  monk.  Does  that  not  exhaust 
your  hunger  and  thirst  for  righteousness  ?  Then  found 
a  new  Order  or  reform  an  old  one.  You  may,  indeed, 
serve  the  Church  anywhere ;  but  special  zeal  is  directed 
along  this  carefully  banked-in  channel.  Upon  another 
side  the  Catholic  Church  guards  this  system  by  the 
proviso  that  no  one  shall  become  an  ascetic  unless  the 
authorities — of  the  Church  and  of  the  Order — are  satisfied 
that  he  has  a  (Divine)  vocation  to  the  monastic  life. 
This  is  a  wise  modification,  bringing  the  system  nearer 
to  Christian  truth.  Protestants  have  two  other  criti- 
cisms to  offer.  First :  Catholics  teach  that  the  ascetic 
vocation  is  intrinsically  higher  than  life  in  the  world  or 
in  the  family.  There  also  Divine  vocations  exist,  but 
inferior  ones.  We  hold  that  there  is  no  high  or  low 
when  God's  will  appoints  our  work.  To  Faber's 
Catholic  formula — 

"  Man  on  earth  no  work  can  do 
More  angel-like  than  this," 

— though  the  reference  is  not  specially  to  the  monastic 
life — we  oppose  Browning's  description  of  the  Angel 
in  "  Theocrite  "— 

"  He  did  God's  will  :  to  him  all  one, 
If  on  the  earth  or  in  the  sun." 


ETHICS    OF    CATHOLICISM       71 

The  most  perfect  fulfilment  of  God's  will  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  universe  was  rendered  by  "man  on  earth" 
— the  man  Christ  Jesus.  And  He,  though  a  man  of 
sorrows,  was  no  solitary,  but  came  even  "  eating  and 
drinking,"  that  He  might  get  near  His  brethren  to  save 
them.  Our  second  criticism  is  this  :  we  find  no  evidence 
that  deliberate  lifelong  poverty  and  celibacy  and  blind 
obedience  to  Church  superiors  constitute  a  Divine 
vocation  at  all. 

The  nobler  spirits  being  thus  accounted  for,  Catholi- 
cism seeks  to  control  the  average  man  and  show  him 
"Gospel"  leniency.  Catholicism  never  confines  the 
Church  to  the  respectable.  In  ways  of  its  own  it  seeks 
to  fulfil  Christ's  ideal  and  "despair  of  no  man"  (Luke 
vi.  35,  R.V.  margin).  The  fundamental  principle  was 
established  in  the  long  controversy  regarding  Christians 
who  had  lapsed  into  mortal  sin.  A  series  of  rigorist 
"heresies" — Montanist,  Novatian,  Donatist — representa- 
tives with  various  modifications  of  grim  early  Christian 
austerity — denied  the  Church's  right  to  receive  such 
penitents  back  to  communion.  God  might  perhaps 
pardon  such ;  the  Church  dared  not  extend  to  them  the 
declaration  of  peace.  But  the  great  Church — headed  on 
this  matter  by  the  Roman  see — established  the  opposite 
principle.  Roman  Catholic  practice  keeps  in  touch 
with  the  vicious  and  even  the  criminal — perhaps  they 
might   yet  be   reclaimed !     Yes,    or   perhaps   they  may 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


not!  Leniency  separated  from  severity  may  prove  no 
more  Christ-like  than  the  austerity  which  suppresses 
Gospel  mercy. 

The  system  of  the  Confessional  is  a  natural  develop- 
ment of  the  Catholic  machinery  for  securing  a  legal 
minimum  of  praiseworthy  conduct,  especially  if  there  be 
associated  with  it  direction.  Confession  rectifies  the 
past;  direction  controls  the  future.  The  minimum, 
which  is  de  rigueur,  is  small  indeed  ;  confession  must  be 
made  before  receiving  the  sacrament  of  the  Mass,  and 
this  sacrament  must  be  taken  at  least  once  a  year  (at 
Easter).  Zealous  Catholics,  of  course,  women  especially, 
are  frequent  at  confession,  and  only  too  willing  to  accept 
direction.  Penances  imposed  after  confession,  and  as 
a  condition  of  absolution,  do  not  in  theological  theory 
deal  with  the  proper  guilt  of  sin,  but  only  with  some  of 
its  lesser  bad  consequences.  In  practice,  the  sacrament 
of  penance  keeps  the  adult  Christian  man  always  a 
child  subject  to  the  Church.  And  the  Church's  attempt 
to  answer  an  impossible  question — How  much  guilt  in 
the  sight  of  God  attaches  to  another  man's  wrongdoing  ? 
— leads  to  a  peculiarly  grave  temptation.  Churchmen, 
anxious  to  conciliate  important  "  penitents,"  pare  away 
moral  guilt.  Hence  arose  the  ugly  casuistry  which 
Pascal  scourged.  It  has  grown  worse  latterly,  not  better, 
through  the  triumph  of  St.  Alfonso  Liguori's  doctrine 
of   "  probabilism."     (Conduct,    which   any   recognised 


ETHICS    OF    CATHOLICISM       73 

Church  authority  holds  to  be  with  a  certain  probability 
permissible,  is  to  be  acquitted  in  the  Confessional  and 
sanctioned  in  direction,  even  although  the  confessor  or 
director  who  is  consulted  might  personally  think  such 
conduct  wicked.)  The  perplexities  of  life  are  really 
sent  us  by  God,  in  order  that,  framing  great  decisions 
on  our  own  responsibility  as  answerable  to  Him,  we 
may  grow  wise.  But  Catholicism  profanely  frustrates 
this.  A  priest  tells  us  authoritatively  what  we  should 
or  may  do,  and  what  we  must  abandon. 

Catholic  ethics  have  had  a  long  history.  They  have 
passed  through  many  stages ;  yet  there  is  a  marvellous 
continuity.  Later  additions  are  sometimes  necessary,  if 
the  original  plan  is  to  be  completed ;  they  are  always 
natural  outgrowths.  But  what  is  the  starting-point? 
Not  the  New  Testament,  but  the  legal  scheme  of 
popular  morals.  The  evolution  of  the  germ  is  normal, 
but  the  germ  itself  is  not  the  plant  which  the  heavenly 
Father  planted. 

In  this  short  statement  nothing  has  been  said  of  the 
grosser  corruptions  which  are  possible  under  a  Catholic 
system.  If  great  masses  of  men  and  women — priests, 
monks,  nuns — are  concussed  into  unwilling  celibacy  by 
various  forms  of  pressure,  there  will  inevitably  be  scandals, 
and  the  Church  must  bear  the  chief  blame  for  such  sins. 
Also  it  is  plain  that  hideous  perversions  of  the  Con- 
fessional are  possible,  if  a  man  who  is  believed  to  be 


74  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

armed  with  indefinite  supernatural  powers  of  washing 
away  sin,  and  whose  duty  it  is  to  pry  deep  into  women's 
hearts  and  lives,  becomes  a  corrupter,  inviting  his 
"  penitent "  to  sin  safeiy.  It  was  the  moral  abuses  of 
the  Middle  Ages  which  invited  the  Reformation.  But, 
even  had  there  been  none  of  these  grosser  abuses,  it 
would  remain  true  that  the  central  beliefs  of  Catholicism 
distort  and  deface  Christian  ethics.  Law  and  merit 
usurp  the  place  of  grace  in  God  and  of  faith  in  man. 
Christian  society  is  weakened  by  having  its  most  devout 
elements  drawn  away  into  the  cloister,  and  those  who  live 
in  the  world  have  little  heart  left  for  high  endeavour ;  are 
they  not  confessedly  second-rate  ?  Yet  all  this — if  we 
may  say  it  reverently — is  the  nearest  thing  to  Christian 
truth  which  God  has  as  yet  been  able  to  teach  the 
greater  part  of  Christendom. 


CHAPTER    IX 

PROTESTANT   ETHICS 

If  it  was  the  moral  abuses  of  the  later  Middle  Ages 
which  created  a  passionate  desire  for  a  sweeping  moral 
reformation,  it  was  the  discovery  of  the  Pauline  gospel 
— notably  Luther's  study  of  Galatians — which  made  the 
Reformation  a  religious  one.  The  Church  had  come  to 
proclaim  God  in  such  terms  that  men  shrank  from  Him. 
He  might  sometimes  be  lenient :  He  was  never  Fatherly. 
It  was  a  marvellous  discovery — God  our  Friend !  The 
best  minds  had  seen  "  the  Judge  severe,  e'en  in  the 
crucifix  " ;  Luther  told  them  in  melting  accents,  "  Indeed, 
our  Lord  Christ  is  no  hard  taskmaster,  but  the  merciful 
forgiver  of  the  whole  world."  The  Pauline  gospel,  mingled 
with  other  elements  by  St.  Augustine,  further  toned 
down  by  Thomas  Aquinas,  hidden  from  view  entirely  in 
popular  mediaeval  Catholicism,  was  nevertheless  alive, 
and  renewed  study  of  the  Greek  Testament  gave  St. 
Paul  fresh  power.  If  a  kind  of  Phariseeism  had  over- 
spread the  Christian  Church,  the  Pharisee  convert  who 


76  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

hated  Pharisee  error  dealt  it  once  more  a  deadly  blow. 
The  age  had  learned  to  be  conscious  of  sin;  it  was 
ripe  for  recovering  the  consciousness  of  grace. 

Naturally,  not  everything  in  St.  Paul  revived.  The 
eschatological  background  could  not  be  seen  clearly  till 
modern  scholarship  arose  ;  although  the  age  had  its  own 
dominating  eschatological  prejudices.  Some  primitive 
Christian  earnestness  was  lost  to  the  new  Protestant 
Paulinism,  with  the  loss  of  the  original  other-worldiness. 
Nor  was  Paul's  doctrine  of  law  fully  revived ;  the  co- 
operating forces  of  "  law  and  gospel "  were  to  save  men. 
Yet  this  seeming  simplification  of  Pauline  teaching  left 
its  difficulties  pretty  much  where  they  were.  The 
Christian,  moved  by  an  inward  love  of  goodness,  was  to 
live  in  the  Spirit,  and  all  was  to  go  well  with  him.  This 
is  doctrine  which  Christianity  cannot  reject.  Christians 
are  lovers  of  God  and  goodness — that  essentially ;  and 
there  is  no  goodness  but  the  Christian.  So  Luther 
taught  in  plain  words  :  "  Good  pious  works  will  never 
make  a  good  pious  man,  but  a  good  pious  man  will  do 
good  pious  works."  Yet  what  if  the  works  do  not 
follow?  What  if  the  features  of  the  ideal  cannot  be 
recognised  in  actual  Christians  ? 

In  regard  to  the  assumed  higher  way  of  life,  Pro- 
testantism declared  war  a  outrance.  Luther,  a  monk, 
married  Catherine  Bora,  a  nun  ;  their  former  vows  they 
had  come  to  regard  as  un-Christian  errors,  which  ought 


PROTESTANT    ETHICS  77 

no  longer  to  trammel  them.  Roman  Catholics,  and  even 
High  Church  Anglicans,  will  never  forgive  this  decisive 
step.  But  it  was  no  time  for  delicate  deference  to 
critical  susceptibilities ;  it  was  a  great  historical  crisis, 
and  needed  bold  action.  The  world  was  ready  to 
applaud.  Give  us  decency,  it  said  in  effect  to  the 
corrupted  Church,  and  we  can  do  without  your  alleged 
sanctity.  Thus  Protestantism  simply  struck  out  the 
supposed  life  of  higher  holiness  practised  through  so 
many  centuries.  A  religion  which  discovered  grace  and 
liberty  rather  than  duty — a  Reformation  which  blotted 
out  the  traditional  forms  in  which  the  highest  Christian 
claims  had  been  expressed — obviously,  Protestantism 
had  its  own  moral  dangers.  Frequently,  especially  in 
Lutheranism,  men  settled  complacently  upon  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith,  and  forgot  the  call  to 
consecration. 

The  positive  meaning  of  the  action  of  Protestants  in 
abolishing  the  monkish  life  could  be  nothing  else  than 
the  familiar  Broad  Church  thesis — the  sacredness  of 
secular  things.  But  we  have  not  received  this  by 
continuous  inheritance  from  Luther.  Mankind  ap- 
proaches nearer  to  the  truth  by  vehement  reactions 
and  counter  reactions.  First,  Protestantism  hardened 
towards  dogma  and  lost  much  of  its  life ;  then  came  (p. 
100)  reactions — pietism,  rationalism,  evangelicalism — 
laying  all  stress  upon  individual  religion;  finally  came 


78  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

the  counter  reaction  of  the  Broad  Church.  We  have 
not  inherited  straight  from  Luther.  Lately  the  ques- 
tion has  even  been  asked  whether  Luther  believed 
the  secular  to  be  sacred  at  all;  whether  he  was  not 
a  medievalist,  bidding  men  simply  save  their  souls; 
correcting  the  Middle  Ages  perhaps  so  far  as  to  con- 
sider outward  things  "adiaphora" — no  hindrance,  but 
certainly  no  helps ! 

There  may  be  some  fragments  of  truth  here.  Protes- 
tantism, especially  Lutheran  and  Anglican,  lived  from 
hand  to  mouth  without  clear  guiding  theory.  Hooker's 
Ecclesiastical  Polity  itself  is  the  work  of  a  man  set  to 
find  a  theoretic  justification  for  a  set  of  anomalous 
facts,  and  showing  wonderful  skill.  The  best  religious 
writers  of  Lutheranism  do  teach  {e.g.  in  hymns)  the 
soul's  rest  in  God  independently  of  outward  good  or 
outward  ill ;  as  in  Luther's  own  great  battle-song — 

"These  things  shall  perish  all; 
The  city  of  God  remaineth." 

And  yet  obviously,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  Protes- 
tantism was  thrown  very  near  the  principle  that  the 
secular  life  is  sacred.  That  must  have  been  the  uncon- 
scious, even  if  not  the  conscious,  logic  of  its  action.  But 
Luther  is  even  explicit :  "  The  obedience  of  a  child,  of  a 
wife,  of  a  serving- man,  is  more  perfect  than  the  obedience 
of  a   monk" — than    self-chosen    submission   to   unreal 


PROTESTANT    ETHICS  79 

claims.  It  is  possible  that,  in  his  opportunism,  moving 
step  by  step,  Luther  did  not  always  see  his  way  clearly  in 
advance.  But  on  the  whole  we  must  protest  against  his 
being  faced — or  against  any  one  being  faced — with  the 
dilemma,  "  Are  you  mediaeval  or  are  you  modern  ? " 
There  is  a  third  possibility,  which  is  best  of  all,  and  which 
Luther  laid  hold  of.     He  was  essentially  Christian. 

Conscious  deliberate  theory  for  Christian  society 
arose  in  Protestantism  as  developed  by  Calvin.  If 
Anglicanism  tended  to  passive  obedience,  and  Luthe- 
ranism  inclined  to  content  itself  with  the  great  truth 
that  no  outward  evil  can  force  us  away  from  Christ, 
the  "  Reformed "  thinkers  began  to  grapple  with  the 
question,  How  will  the  principles  of  the  Gospel  re- 
model man  and  society?  The  Reformation  had  been 
an  appeal  to  the  democracy  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Without  bishop  or  priest  or  sacrament,  face  to  face 
with  Christ  alone,  the  private  believer  was  to  enter  into 
all  the  fulness  of  God.  It  wras  a  very  different  thing 
to  call  into  life  a  political  democracy,  unpledged  to 
Christianity.  But  liberty  is  an  infectious  thing,  and — 
especially  when  the  more  stalwart  forms  of  Protestantism 
were  oppressed  by  hostile  governments — liberty  tended  to 
be  claimed  not  only  in  worship  but  in  politics.  So  in 
Holland,  so  in  English  Puritanism,  and  so  in  Scotland, 
where  the  middle  class,  and  the  modern  nation  as  a 
whole,  are  the  creation  of  Protestantism, 


8o  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

This,  after  all,  was  the  greatest  difference  between 
the  Paulinism  of  St.  Paul  and  that  of  the  Protestant 
Reformers.  The  apostle  lived  and  died  as  the  citizen 
and  subject  of  an  autocratic  empire.  Protestantism 
stood  by  the  fountains  of  modern  history  and  helped  to 
open  the  floodgates  for  the  new  forces.  The  rights  of 
Christian  consciences  called  attention  to  the  rights  of 
every  human  conscience,  and  then  to  all  the  varied 
"  rights  of  man."  It  was  not  manifest  all  at  once,  but 
the  tendency  was  at  work. 

Protestantism  rehabilitated  the  family.  Catholicism 
no  doubt  had  professed  to  hold  the  family  sacred — was 
not  marriage  a  sacrament  ?  And  yet  a  stigma  was  cast 
on  it  by  the  celibacy  not  only  of  those  following  the 
"  perfect "  life,  but  of  the  parochial  clergy  as  well.  The 
married  ministers  of  Protestant  religion  may  seem 
unheroic ;  but  how  much  of  sober  practical  godliness, 
and  of  service  to  the  community,  and  of  "joint  heirship 
of  the  grace  of  life,"  belongs  to  the  homes  of  which 
these  are  the  crowning  type  ! 

Protestantism  rehabilitated  the  nation.  It  is  true 
that  the  Reformers  did  not  regard  themselves  as  break- 
ing with  the  universal  Church ;  they  were  reforming  it. 
But  the  international  organisation,  which  gave  power  in 
many  lands  to  a  foreign  prince,  came  to  an  end  in 
Protestant  countries ;  and  the  nation  might  henceforth 
mean  more  than  it  could  do  while  dreams  of  a  world- 


PROTESTANT    ETHICS  81 

wide  Christian  empire  in  civil  things,  stood  alongside 
the  half-realised  vision  of  a  world-wide  hierarchical 
Church.  Hooker  treats  Church  and  nation  as  one, 
absolutely.  That  is  to  defend — and  also  to  exaggerate 
— the  purely  Protestant  point  of  view. 

Protestantism  rehabilitated  wealth.  The  well-doing 
sober  citizen,  who  sought  to  serve  God  in  his  daily 
vocation,  inevitably  made  money.  Respectability,  with 
its  many  excellences  and  also  with  its  real  limitations, 
became  as  characteristic  of  Protestant  godliness  as  dirt 
and  vermin  had  been  of  Catholic  sanctity.  The  lands 
of  the  Reformed  Churches  especially  sprang  to  the  front, 
with  their  more  conscious  grasp  of  principle  and  their 
progressive  spirit. 

The  relation  of  Protestantism  to  the  democratic 
movement — already  glanced  at — is  harder  to  sum  up. 
Democracy  gained  no  direct  support  in  Lutheranism ; 
nor  yet  in  Anglicanism,  unless  for  the  Puritan  move- 
ment— the  older  form  of  acutely  Protestant  Angli- 
canism, so  unlike  evangelicalism  in  politics,  and  in  some 
other  respects.  Calvin  formulated  the  demand  that 
nations  should  obey  the  law  of  Christ  as  laid  down  in 
the  Bible.  The  Old  Testament  was  a  great  book  with 
Puritans  and  other  Calvinists.  They  found  in  it  a  love 
of  national  liberty,  such  as  New  Testament  believers 
had  no  opportunity  to  feel  or  to  formulate.  They  also 
found   in    it    persecution,  and,  like    their    neighbours, 

F 


82  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

they  persecuted.  Yet  their  fault  was  the  graver,  be- 
cause their  principles  were  more  plainly  opposed  to  the 
atrocious  policy.  Spiritualising  sects,  and  sects  forming 
a  small  minority — Quakers,  Baptists,  &c. — were  the 
first  to  make  conscious  assertion  of  toleration  as  a 
principle,  if  Milton  and  Cromwell  gave  it  resonance. 
All  intelligent  Protestants  ought  to  have  joined  in 
chorus.  Compelled  goodness  can  never  be  Christian 
goodness.  If  justice  and  fairness  are  not  sufficient  to 
teach  us  toleration,  that  principle  should  subdue  our  last 
doubts.  Unhappily,  it  can  be  said  with  too  much 
truth  that  toleration  only  came  into  use  when  a  dead- 
lock had  been  created.  Necessity  was  its  teacher,  not 
Christ.  Calvinist  Christianity  had  conceived  that  it  was 
to  serve  Christ  by  copying  the  Old  Testament — by 
persecuting  religious  error,  and  by  harrying  vice  as  a 
crime.  When  such  a  policy  became  impossible,  Protes- 
tantism gave  up — only  for  a  time,  please  God — the 
effort  to  reconstruct  the  world  according  to  the  will  of 
Christ.  The  rights  of  man — to  a  free  conscience  and 
to  a  share  of  political  power — were  established  in  the 
eighteenth  century  as  truths  of  the  enlightened  reason. 
All  that  can  be  claimed  for  Protestantism  is  that  it  had 
done  something  considerable  to  serve  liberty,  although 
half  blindly. 

We  are  to  be  grateful  for  the  past  of  Protestantism. 
We  are  to  be  loyal  to  its  principles,  and  yet  not  exactly 


PROTESTANT    ETHICS  83 

their  slaves;  it  would  be  strange  if  that  were  our 
duty!  It  is  clear  to  us  that,  at  the  Reformation,  in 
morals  as  well  as  in  doctrine,  God  gave  His  people  a 
fuller  grasp  of  many  great  Christian  truths  than  all  the 
previous  centuries  had  known.  But  that  does  not  mean 
that  progress  ceased  to  be  possible  after  15 — .  Modern 
life  has  large  opportunities.  We  are  free  to  disown  or 
to  enthrone  Christ  as  hardly  any  previous  age  has  been. 
Nor  is  Christian  truth  exhausted.  It  is  much  that  the 
Reformers  heard  Christ's  voice  in  that  of  St.  Paul.  We 
listen  to  the  same  message,  and  bow  before  its  splendour ; 
but  may  we  not  hear  yet  another  voice?  May  we  not 
learn — more  directly  still — at  Jesus'  feet  ? 


CHAPTER   X 

STANDARDS   OF   AUTHORITY   IN 
CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

What  authority  or  authorities  should  we  appeal  to  in 
Christian  ethics  ?  If  there  are  several  such  authorities, 
how  are  they  related  to  each  other  ? 

(1)  Supreme  over  all  stands  the  authority  of  God. 
To  do  "  the  will  of  God  "  is  Christ's  own  formulation  of 
the  ethical  ideal  (Matt.  xii.  50 ;  cf.  I.  John  ii.  17).  A 
false  note  is  struck  in  a  beautiful  hymn  when  we  sing, 
"To  do  the  will  of  Jesus,  that  is  rest."  Jesus  is  the 
human  name ;  and  Jesus  says,  "  I  came  down  from 
heaven  not  to  do  Mine  own  will,  but  the  will  of  Him  that 
sent  Me."     Another  hymn  gives  a  truer  utterance — 

"  Thou  Thyself  didst  never  please  : 
God  was  all  Thy  happiness." 

Of  course,  by  the  will  of  God  we  mean  nothing  arbi- 
trary or  casual  (p.  47),  although  the  mediaeval  school- 
man Duns  Scotus  very  nearly,  if  not  quite,  taught  that 


STANDARDS    OF    AUTHORITY     85 

God's  choice  made  right  into  right,  and  wrong  into 
wrong.  Hence,  when  the  late  Prof.  Bain  of  Aberdeen 
spoke  of  the  "arbitrary"  will  of  God  as  one  possible 
ethical  standard,  he  had  some  justification  for  inserting 
this  adjective.  But  instructed  Christians,  in  placing 
God's  will  as  supreme  over  all,  mean  His  essential  will — 
that  eternal  goodness,  holiness,  love  which  we  call  the 
character  of  God. 

(2)  Inseparable  from  the  authority  of  God  is  that  of 
Christ.  In  a  sense,  Christ  is  nowhere  supreme — He 
came  in  His  Father's  name.  In  another  sense,  Christ  is 
everywhere  supreme,  for  God  reigns  through  Him.  We 
have  in  Him  all  our  knowledge  of  God  ;  or,  if  we  reach 
a  dim  perception  through  nature  and  conscience,  it  has 
to  be  readjusted  in  the  light  of  Christ.  Hence  (a) 
Christ's  teaching  must  be  obeyed ;  and  historical  study, 
careful  and  reverent,  must  ascertain  what  the  Master  said. 
There  is  no  legitimate  Christian  doctrine  which  has  not 
its  roots  in  these  words.  There  is  no  genuine  Christian 
duty  which  cannot  be  founded  upon  our  Lord's  own  de- 
clarations, (b)  With  Christ's  words  we  must  take  His  ex- 
ample. To  make  virtue  lovely,  which  so  often  shows  sour 
and  repulsive,  it  needed  that  life  of  lives.  A.  Ritschl 
and  others  have  paradoxically  contended  that  Christ's 
example  is  nothing  else  than  flawless  faithfulness  to  a 
Divine  vocation ;  that  our  calling  is  vastly  lower  than 
His ;  and  that  hence  we  learn  but  little  from  contem- 


86  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

plating  His  pattern.  This  is  a  recoil  from  the  Roman 
Catholic  programme  of  imitating  the  externals  of  Christ's 
lot.  That  no  doubt  was  an  error,  even  in  so  beautiful  a 
shape  as  Francis  of  Assisi's  devotion  to  ''holy  poverty." 
The  Christian  life  is  not  a  thing  of  externals,  but  one  of 
principles.  And  yet  we  must  not  in  recoil  from  error 
sweep  past  the  central  truths  towards  opposite  extremes. 
The  New  Testament  speaks  of  Christ's  example  as  shown 
in  the  initial  self-sacrifice  from  which  His  earthly  life 
sprang  (II.  Cor.  viii.  9  ;  Phil.  ii.  6) ;  in  doing  good  (Acts 
x.  38) ;  in  choosing  to  serve  rather  than  rule  (Matt.  xx. 
28) ;  and,  lastly,  in  Christ's  forgiving  love  (Eph.  iv.  32  ; 
v.  1).  The  strange  but  significant  result  is  that  the 
glorious  Christ  is  mainly  a  pattern  to  us  of  humility — 
the  central  religious  virtue  (p.  130).  Christ  exhibits 
this  humble  unselfishness  specially  in  His  redeeming 
death ;  and  so  the  thought  of  His  example  passes  into 
that  of  (c)  His  Grace,  or  what  Dr.  Forsyth  calls  "  the 
authority  of  the  Cross."  The  Christian  motive  is  thank- 
fulness for  redeeming  love.  And  personal  love  to  our 
Lord  incorporates  love  towards  all  the  great  principles 
for  which  He  stands. 

(3)  Scripture  must  not  be  taken  as  a  legal  code  of 
definite  external  requirements.  That  is  a  Catholic  view 
of  the  Bible,  or  it  belongs  to  the  inferior  Protestantism 
of  the  second  generation.  Still,  the  Bible  is  sacred.  It 
is  the  channel  by  which  we  know  God's  revelation.     It 


STANDARDS    OF   AUTHORITY     87 

is  the  chief  classic  of  the  Christian  religion  (and  so  also 
of  Christian  ethics) ;  though  secondary  classics  ought  to 
have  their  lower  place — hymns,  creeds  (if  in  the  right 
spirit),  Christian  biographies  and  autobiographies,  books 
of  devotion.  In  this  little  book  we  shall  illustrate  or 
enforce  our  teaching  mainly  from  the  Bible,  as  all  the 
text-books  do.  Intelligence  is  necessary,  as  well  as 
reverence,  in  using  Scripture.  The  writings  it  includes 
were  largely  occasional ;  we  must  make  sure  that  we  have 
warrant  for  transferring  its  precepts  to  our  altered  con- 
ditions. Again :  Not  all  Scripture  is  of  equal  rank ; 
notably,  the  Old  Testament  stands  lower  than  the  New. 
Many  errors,  mediaeval  and  Puritan,  arose  from  ignoring 
this.  But  for  the  Old  Testament,  persecution  and  witch- 
burning  might  never  have  stained  the  record  of  the 
Church.  Even  the  New  Testament's  expectation  of  a 
near  end  to  the  world  was  falsified  by  the  event.  It  did 
not  please  God  to  grant  it  a  literal  fulfilment.  Supreme 
over  Old  Testament,  and  even  over  New,  Christ  must 
stand ;  in  His  words,  His  example,  His  Grace. 

(4)  Parents  may  seem  to  be  less  an  authority  than  a 
fragment  from  a  great  institution — the  family — named 
out  of  its  due  place  (chap.  xv.).  But  let  it  be  observed 
that  we  are  speaking  here  only  of  authority.  Now  the 
authority  of  God  or  Christ  or  the  Bible  comes  to  us 
usually,  first  of  all,  through  fathers  and  mothers.  And, 
even  when  they  cease  to  be  authorities,  parents  remain 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


a  very  precious  and  sacred  influence.  Dr.  E.  A.  Abbott 
{Philomythus,  pp.  68,  69)  has  strikingly  pointed  out  how 
the  child-soul  ought  to  work  its  way  to  faith  in  the 
heavenly  Father  through  its  trust  in  the  earthly  parent. 

Dr.  Robert  Rainy  once  feared  that  too  much  was 
being  said  in  certain  quarters  about  Church  authority, 
and  tried  to  turn  it  off  with  a  smile  by  saying  :  "  Yes, 
the  Church  and  mothers  are  great  powers."  But  we  may 
accept  this  supplement  in  all  seriousness.  "  Children 
obey  your  parents  in  the  Lord  "  (Eph.  vi.  1)  may  mean 
once  in  twenty  times,  Obey  your  parents  so  far  as  they 
represent  the  Lord.  The  other  nineteen  times  it  means, 
Obey  them  because  they  represent  the  Lord:  please 
them  in  order  to  please  Him.  So  long  as  God  is  called 
Father,  parental  authority  must  rank  in  Christian  ethics 
among  the  sacred  things.  Ancestor  worship  is  a  Pagan 
distortion  of  this  ;  but  it  is  the  distortion  of  a  truth. 

(5)  The  State  chiefly  relies  upon  (a)  force;  that  is 
its  most  proper  mode  of  action  (p.  139).  It  is  true,  as 
Tolstoy  urges,  that  force  can  never  make  us  virtuous 
(cf.  p.  140);  yet  we  may  hold  that  the  State  ought 
to  exist,  and  that  criminal  law  and  administrative  acts 
form  outworks  of  morality — imperfect  yet  valuable. 
Merely  to  keep  out  of  the  hands  of  the  police  makes 
no  man  good ;  yet  police  action  may  and  should  hamper 
certain  sins,  may  and  should  help  society  onwards  on  the 
road  towards  virtue,     (b)  The  State  has  further  positive 


STANDARDS    OF    AUTHORITY     89 

claims  upon  us.  Oldest  and  simplest  is  the  demand 
that  the  citizen  should  risk  his  life  in  war  for  his  country. 
Evil  as  war  is,  we  may  be  thankful  that  it  -addresses  this 
great  challenge  to  selfishness,  and  so  far  functions  as  an 
ethical  force.  But  further,  as  the  State  is  democratised 
duties  of  good  citizenship  spread  from  a  ruling  or  official 
caste  to  the  whole  people.  If  the  New  Testament  bade 
us  "Be  subject  to  every  ordinance  of  man,  for  the 
Lord's  sake  "  (I.  Pet.  ii.  13),  the  spirit  of  Christ  now  bids 
us  serve  Him  in  the  opportunities  of  public  life,  national 
and  municipal. 

(6)  Society  is  less  of  a  formal  authority  than  the  State. 
It  relies  upon  influence  rather  than  upon  force.  And  yet 
it  remains  a  very  real  authority,  (a)  Society  may  be  said 
to  appoint  us  our  daily  work.  Under  State  Socialism 
(p.  164),  when  society  and  State  would  be  utterly  identi- 
cal, this  would  probably  take  place  through  the  rigorous 
method  of  force.  But  even  under  our  looser  organisation 
it  is  society  that  gives  or  withholds  opportunity.  One 
must  have  had  either  an  unusually  happy  or  an  unusually 
unhappy  experience  of  life,  if  one  has  never  been  thankful 
to  come  back  from  holiday  and  take  one's  place  again 
between  the  shafts.  All  business  duty  is  a  social  service 
(as  the  non-Christian  Comte  impressively  taught).  We 
owe  to  society  what  we  owe  supremely  to  God — that 
our  work  should  be  done  "heartily"  and  "with  good- 
will" (Col.  hi.  23 ;  Eph.  vi.  6,  7),  even  if  law  should  be 


CHRI  STIAN    ETHICS 


too  clumsy-fingered  to  call  us  to  a  reckoning  for  scamped 
service,  (b)  Custom  may  be  good  or  bad.  Again,  it 
may  be  excessive  or  defective.  Custom  shapes  the 
bricks  so  that  they  fit  together  in  a  fabric  of  mutual 
"  edification."  Morality  itself  in  one  type  grows  out 
of  custom  and  institution ;  let  us  think  of  the  German 
word  Sittlichkeit)  or  of  the  connection  in  Greek  between 
ethos  and  ethos.  Of  course,  there  is  another  type,  more 
inward,  more  ideal,  that  has  little  to  do  with  custom. 
And  yet  we  "ought  not  to  leave  the  other  undone" 
(Matt,  xxiii.  23).  Before  we  can  correct  past  inheritances, 
we  must  be  loyal  to  what  of  good  they  contain.  Good 
taste  and  good  manners  work  through  custom.  We 
must  never  light-heartedly  break  it,  although  sometimes 
we  must  fight  it  to  the  death.  It  is  a  minor  morality 
(comp.  p.  134)-  (c)  A  shade  lower  still  stands  public 
opinion,  for  it  may  easily  prove  fussy  and  conventional. 
Yet,  without  a  healthy  public  opinion,  moral  relapses  will 
be  frequent  and  moral  advance  impossible.  It  was  the 
utter  fanaticism  of  individualism  which  led  J.  S.  Mill — 
personally  a  virtuous  man — to  maintain  that  public 
opinion  had  nothing  to  do  with  a  man's  attitude  towards 
what  is  called,  in  the  narrower  sense,  morality.  Alas,  only 
a  half-moralised  public  opinion  can  be  found  among  us. 
(7)  The  Church  may  be  regarded  with  A.  Ritschl  as 
being,  first  of  all,  (a)  a  fellowship  in  worship.  But  as 
we  worship  God  we  take  anew  our  vows  to  live  according 


STANDARDS    OF    AUTHORITY     91 

to  His  will ;  and  duties  that  seemed  hard  or  oppressive 
grow  welcome  again — communion  with  our  Father  re- 
viving our  insight.  This  is  the  greatest  moral  service 
rendered  by  the  Christian  Church,  this  almost  informal 
moulding  of  the  inner  life  of  her  members. 

(b)  We  descend  a  great  way  when  we  turn  to  speak 
of  Church  law.  There  long  raged  a  controversy,  now 
almost  obsolete,  regarding  the  Church's  power  to  impose 
rites  and  ceremonies  not  found  in  Scripture.  The 
Puritans  (who  said  the  Church  could  do  no  such  thing, 
and  claimed  "  liberty  of  conscience  "  for  the  individual  in 
that  special  narrow  sense)  read  the  Bible  too  much  like  a 
law  code.  And  yet  in  principle  they  were  right.  The 
Church  may  neither  require  nor  yet  forbid  anything  except 
in  accordance  with  the  primitive  Scriptural  revelation. 
Naturally  there  is  endless  difficulty  in  applying  this  prin- 
ciple to  details.  Mission  Churches,  composed  of  converts 
from  non-Christian  religions,  have  roundly  forbidden  the 
use  of  opium  or  of  alcohol.  We  should  think  similar  pro- 
hibitions a  very  extreme  assertion  of  Church  authority ; 
yet  dare  we  say  that  our  revered  brethren  have  miscon- 
strued their  duty  ?  Indirectly,  such  action  may  be  neces- 
sary in  their  circumstances,  if  they  are  to  be  faithful  to 
their  supreme  tasks.  For  us,  if  only  because  of  denomi- 
national rivalries,  such  action  is  unthinkable.  (Are  we 
sure  that  we  are  morally  adult  enough  to  have  the 
unity  of  Christendom  bestowed  on  us? — p.  148.) 


02 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


(c)  Church  discipline  among  Protestants  deals  with 
sins  which  are  of  a  nature  to  become  generally  known, 
and  so  to  constitute  "offences"  or  "scandals" — 
stumbling-blocks  tempting  others.  Such  faults  cannot 
be  dealt  with  unless  they  are  grave;  yet  it  is  by  no 
means  implied  that  some  of  the  secret  faults  which  dis- 
cipline cannot  touch  are  not  graver  still.  Discipline 
is  meant  to  reclaim  {cf.  p.  71).  There  is  no  more 
painful  part  of  Church  duty ;  yet  much  may  be  achieved 
by  its  wise  and  faithful  performance,  (d)  Church  custom 
and  Church  public  opinion  make  their  own  contributions. 
It  is  or  was  a  tradition  of  evangelicalism  to  attend 
Sunday  service  (twice?),  to  read  Scriptures  and  pray 
morning  and  evening,  to  maintain  family  worship,  and, 
if  possible,  to  take  some  share  in  organised  Church 
work.     Is  the  tradition  obsolete  ?     Ought  it  to  be  ? 

(8)  Conscience  is  the  last  authority  to  be  mentioned, 
(a)  It  has  been  said  with  great  force  and  truth  that 
"  Principles  do  not  apply  themselves ;  they  must  he  put 
into  operation."  The  morality  of  custom  and  public 
opinion  will  be  merely  dead  or  fossil  morality  if  it 
is  followed  mechanically.  There  is  little  or  nothing 
Christian  in  such  service.  But,  when  the  Christian 
conscience  acknowledges  and  obeys  custom  because  it 
recognises  therein  God's  will,  and  sees  a  promise  of 
blessing  to  men,  then  morality  lives,  (b)  Those  who 
thus  loyally  obey  good  custom  will  be  in  a  condition  to 


STANDARDS    OF   AUTHORITY     93 

correct  it  or  go  beyond  it.  (c)  If  need  be,  they  may 
defy  it.  The  need  will  not  arise  so  often  as  British 
Protestants,  children  of  successful  revolutions  in  Church 
and  State,  are  apt  to  suppose.  And  yet  the  need  is 
fully  in  the  line  of  Christian  duty.  Christ  may  again 
call  for  His  martyrs. 

The  general  ideal  is  one  of  loyalty  contemporaneously 
to  all  these  authorities.     If  they  seem  to  conflict,  and 

we  cannot  find  that  the  conflict  is  unreal,  what  is  our 
duty  ?  Our  ultimate  loyalty  is  to  God  revealed  in 
Christ ;  the  closest  utterance  of  God  is  in  the  conscience 
of  a  Christian.  It  never  can  be  right  to  disobey  con- 
science. Our  conscience  may  mislead  us.  We  may  be 
to  blame  for  mishandling  it  in  the  past,  so  that  it  now 
keeps  a  false  reckoning.  No  matter;  we  must  obey  it 
now,  at  our  peril;  disobedience  brings  greater  perils. 
Of  course,  we  must  cross  question  our  consciences, 
and  make  as  sure  as  we  can  that  the  genuine  inward 
authority  speaks.  Again,  it  is  only  the  adult  for  whom 
such  advice  holds  fully  good  ;  children  must  hang  up 
all  doubtful  questions  so  long  as  they  possibly  can. 
Yet  the  bright  terrible  thing  dwells  among  us  and 
within  us.  Christ  came  to  send  a  sword  (Matt.  x.  34). 
It  is  a  moral  tragedy,  whoever's  blame  it  may  be,  when 
lawful  authorities  are  ranged  on  opposite  sides.  No 
good  man  will  light-heartedly  waste  the  world's  moral 


94  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

resources  by  hissing  on  the  State  against  the  Church,  or 
the  Church  against  the  State  {e.g.  Marriage  laws,  p.  137). 
Yet  the  Christian  in  whose  mind  God  Himself  has 
awakened  faith  in  Christ  does  not  walk  in  darkness, 
but  in  the  light  of  life.  Even  his  imperfect  dutifulness 
and  his  flawed  conscientiousness  serve  God,  help  his 
brethren,  and  glorify  the  Master.  Going  modestly  but 
resolutely  forward,  in  strife  itself  he  will  be  essentially 
at  heart  a  peacemaker.  And  the  blessing  of  peace- 
makers will  be  his. 


CHAPTER   XI 

THE   BEGINNINGS   OF   THE   CHRISTIAN 
LIFE 

Traditionally  throughout  the  greater  part  of  Christendom 
it  has  been  taught  that  the  life  of  discipleship  has  its 
origin  in  what  is  termed  sacramental  grace.  Baptism 
implants  it ;  confirmation  matures  it ;  thereafter  the 
sacrament  of  the  altar  nourishes  and  maintains  it.  Not 
that  any  form  of  Christian  theology  ignores  the  existence 
of  moral  conditions  required  for  salvation.  Catholicism 
speaks  in  terms  of  law  (p.  66)  as  well  as  in  terms  of 
sacramental  grace.  But  when  it  is  a  question  of  the 
initiation  of  the  new  life,  the  Catholic  mind  speaks 
mainly  of  sacraments.  That  is  how  it  tries  to  show 
itself  loyal  to  the  doctrine  of  grace  in  God.  The  new 
life  is  not  merely  law,  merit,  penances,  &c. — man's 
work ! — but  God's  work,  viz.  in  sacramental  mystery. 
How  are  the  two  factors  co-ordinated  ?  Catholic 
theology  teaches  that — a  legal  minimum  of  obedience 
being  presupposed — sacraments  bless  and  save  unless 


96  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

the  recipient  wilfully  interposes  an  obstacle  which  frus- 
trates their  tendency.  Apart  from  such  crass  counter- 
working by  definite  acts  of  sin,  sacraments  ensure  the 
Divine  blessing — we  have  only  to  let  them  be  ! 

Is  it  correct  to  say  that  the  New  Testament  regards 
sacraments  as  in  some  sense  channels  of  saving  grace  ? 
We  believe  that  it  does  employ  such  language,  St.  Paul 
especially,  and  with  a  special  reference  to  baptism 
(Rom.  vi.  3;  Gal.  iii.  27).  But  this  at  once  suggests  a 
very  important  caution.  Characteristically  and  centrally 
(as  the  older  Protestantism  taught),  if  not  even  exclu- 
sively (as  many  modern  scholars  hold),  New  Testament 
baptism  is  baptism  of  adults.  Ordinarily  the  candi- 
date is  a  convert  from  heathenism.  In  such  a  life, 
baptism  has  a  marked  moral  meaning.  It  is  the  definite 
outward  act  by  which  a  convert  breaks  with  his  heathen 
past  and  enters  into  solemn  covenant  with  Christ.  All 
sacrifices  are  involved  in  that  decisive  step.  Now  St. 
Paul's  teaching  is  that,  as  the  man  comes  to  baptism, 
seeking  Christ  with  penitence  and  faith,  Christ  comes  in 
baptism  to  meet  him  with  forgiveness  and  blessing. 

Alongside  of  this  sacramental  teaching  (and  much 
more  emphatic)  we  have  St.  Paul's  doctrine  of  faith, 
and  of  grace  apart  from  the  law.  Trust  in  God  through 
Christ — never  to  be  dissociated  from  repentance,  yet 
with  the  emphasis  laid  upon  trust  in  offered  mercy — 
saves,  and  saves  completely.     If  we  do  justice  to  this 


THE    CHRISTIAN    LIFE  97 

part  of  the  apostle's  teaching,  our  doctrine  about  sac- 
raments must  be  something  very  different  from  the 
assertion  that  they  alone  save,  and  that — provided  the 
receiver  interposes  no  special  obstacles — they  save 
automatically. 

The  Christian  community  very  early  became  a  heredi- 
tary fellowship.  It  drew  its  members  more  and  more 
from  the  children  of  Christian  homes,  less  and  less 
from  the  heathen  world  by  conversion.  What  was  to 
be  done  with  baptism?  After  a  period  of  distinct 
hesitation — why,  asks  Tertullian,  should  "the  age  of 
innocence  too  hastily"  use  up  the  single  opportunity 
of  washing  away  sin  ? — infant  baptism  became  the  rule. 
No  distinction  was  put  upon  its  meaning  when  extended 
to  children  (or  when  specialised  as  a  rite  of  childhood). 
This  fact  did  much  to  materialise  the  conception  of 
sacramental  grace  and  to  despiritualise  Christianity. 

Contemporaneously  with  the  Reformation  came  the 
Anabaptist  movement.  Inspired  with  far-reaching  social 
enthusiasms,  if  degenerating  too  often  into  wild  excesses, 
the  new  Radicalism  gave  birth  before  long  to  the 
sober  Calvinistic  Churches  of  the  Baptist  order.  A 
recoil  from  sacramentalism  may  be  urged  by  evangelical, 
or,  again,  by  rationalist  motives,  and  both  strains  are 
visible  among  modern  Baptists.  Yet  they  agree  on  the 
decisive  point — the  children  of  Christians  are  to  stand 
outside  formal  Church  membership.      Most  Protestant 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


evangelicals  have  shrunk  from  that  decision,  supporting 
their  policy  by  arguments  good  and  bad.  Let  us  see 
how  the  Christian  life  in  children  may  be  interpreted 
not  upon  sacramental  but  upon  moral  lines. 

The  beginnings  of  conscious  Christianity  may  be 
referred  to  what  Bushnell  called  "  Christian  nurture." 
Although  the  child  inherits  sin,  breathing  it  in  from  the 
tainted  atmosphere,  human  and  social,  into  which  he 
is  born,  he  may  and  ought  likewise  to  inherit  at  least 
the  predisposition  to  faith  ;  and  reverence  for  his  parents 
ought  to  lead  him  on  (p.  83)  by  a  scarcely  conscious 
transition  into  godliness.  When  he  arrives  at  manhood 
it  must  be  expected  that  he  will  feel  new  speculative 
doubts  or  new  temptations  to  wilfulness ;  but  it  is  also 
to  be  expected  that  by  God's  mercy  he  will  emerge 
from  both  into  definite  personal  Christianity. 

This  ethical  view  of  the  awakening  of  the  higher 
life  (so  important  for  Christian  Ethics)  is  specially 
characteristic  of  what  is  often  called  the  Broad  Church 
school.  Looking  back  in  the  light  of  such  beliefs  upon 
the  sacraments,  we  conceive  Christian  nurture  as  the 
detailed  fulfilment  of  what  is  pledged  in  symbol  at 
infant  baptism.  Plainly,  too,  the  resettling  of  convic- 
tion upon  a  personal  basis  at  manhood  or  womanhood 
fulfils  what  is  symbolised  in  confirmation.  Churches 
practising  infant  baptism  ought  to  regard  that  rite  as  a 
standing  witness  to  the  truth  that  the  new  life  is  to  be 


THE    CHRISTIAN    LIFE  99 

looked  for  and  hoped  for,  even  in  childhood,  among 
those  who  receive  Christian  nurture.  And  confirmation, 
if  fully  moralised,  presents  to  each  soul  emerging  from 
childhood  the  great  choice  which  has  now  to  be  made 
for  oneself.  (But  is  it  not  traditional  to  confirm  earlier 
— before  the  age  of  struggle  and  decision  ?) 

Protestant  Churches,  practising  infant  baptism,  prac- 
tising or  not  practising  confirmation,  started  upon 
their  career  hopefully.  The  external  rites  were  to 
express,  safeguard,  and  develop  the  inward  realities  of 
repentance,  faith  and  love  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  Unfor- 
tunately, it  did  not  always  prove  so.  Protestantism  was 
in  danger  of  becoming  a  new  routine,  colder  perhaps 
than  Catholicism.  Against  this  in  the  providence  of 
God  a  reaction  showed  itself.  German  Pietism  was 
and  is  chiefly  concerned  to  secure  a  warm  inner  life 
of  devotion  in  those  who  profess  and  call  themselves 
Christians ;  British  and  American  revivalism  is  chiefly 
concerned  to  secure  that  the  beginning  shall  be  a 
genuine  beginning,  not  merely  a  form.  The  soul  is 
to  pass  from  death  to  life  at  conversion.  Our  Anglo- 
Saxon  evangelicalism  has  been  moulded  throughout  not 
only  by  the  Reformation  but  by  the  Revival.  With  us 
the  latter  is  more  than  a  protest,  more  than  even  a 
successful  protest.  It  is  the  dominant  type  of  religious 
development. 

We  have  passed  under  review   three   very  different 


ioo  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

conceptions  of  the  origin  of  personal  Christian  life. 
In  practice,  however,  they  are  by  no  means  so  alien  to 
each  other  as  theory  would  seem  to  make  them.  A 
sacramentalism  which  is  morally  in  earnest  cannot  be 
indifferent  either  to  nurture  or  to  inner  decision  at 
confirmation;  either  to  the  conduct  which  does  the 
will  of  God,  or  to  "  missions  "  repeating  the  warm  appeal 
of  the  Gospel  for  those  who  outwardly  or  in  heart  have 
gone  astray.  A  Broad  Churchism  which  is  loyally 
Christian  will  foster  morals  without  disparaging  either 
the  sacraments  or  the  doctrines  of  the  Church.  And 
revivalism  may  modify  its  early  theology,  which  re- 
garded conversion  as  always  essentially  catastrophic. 
Not  even  in  conversion  do  we  find  the  naked  super- 
natural disentangled  from  everything  that  is  natural. 
The  modern  statistical  method — pushed  even  into  this 
sacred  region ! — makes  it  plain  that  the  organised  re- 
vivals of  the  evangelical  Churches  are  for  the  most 
part  parallels  to  confirmation,  i.e.  they  chiefly  gather 
in  young  men  and  young  women. 

What,  then,  is  conversion  ?  It  used  to  be  interpreted, 
in  the  light  of  the  darkest  doctrine  of  sin  (p.  13),  as  the 
bringing  of  the  soul  by  the  immediate,  miraculous,  and 
sovereign  or  arbitrary  act  of  God  out  of  condemnation 
into  salvation.  The  smoothest  Christian  development 
was  viewed  as  only  a  disguised  catastrophe.  This  we 
cannot  fully  accept.    As  was  said  above  (p.  16),  Christian 


THE    CHRISTIAN    LIFE  101 

ethic  maintains  that  each  soul  of  man  has  a  true  chance 
of  turning  to  God  at  the  sound  of  the  Gospel.  The 
doctrine  of  spiritual  "  biogenesis "  (see  Drummond's 
Natural  Law  in  the  Spiritual  World)  is  the  reasoned 
denial  of  our  position.  Our  assertion  of  the  position 
involves  a  reasoned  denial  of  the  old  revivalist  view, 
that  regeneration  and  passive  conversion  are  absolutely 
identical  things.  Not  every  regeneration  takes  the 
form  of  a  conversion,  nor  is  every  apparent  conversion 
a  true  regeneration. 

It  is  plain  that  very  different  things  may  be  described 
by  the  same  word,  Conversion.  As  long  as  the  severer 
doctrine  of  sin  and  the  fear  of  hell  dominate  men's 
minds,  Christian  life  will  almost  inevitably  begin  in 
spasms  of  terror  (the  "law  work"),  followed  by  a 
paroxysm  of  joy.  But  it  is  possible  for  conversion  to 
mean  less — even  to  mean  little  !  To-day  it  chiefly 
means  self-devotion  for  the  future,  not  escape  from  the 
past.  The  same  Henry  Drummond,  whose  early  mani- 
festo was  so  uncompromising  a  reassertion  of  Calvinism, 
became  latterly  the  agent  in  producing  many  conver- 
sions of  the  other  type.  His  was  a  sweet  and  pure 
influence,  but,  as  transmitted  to  other  lives,  it  often 
lacked  depth.  In  many  quarters  we  have  similar  teach- 
ing; and  we  are  threatened  with  a  very  thin  type  of 
Christianity.  The  form  of  a  supernatural  crisis  is  main- 
tained, and  yet  the  whole  content  of  the  supernatural 


to2  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

may  be  lost.  There  are  plenty  "  converts  "  to-day  who 
do  not  know  what  the  word  redemption  means. 

Looking  from  the  outside — not  as  God  looks,  who 
knows  the  heart — we  may  describe  conversion  as  a 
quickening  of  the  religious  affections.  Hence  it  does 
not  necessarily  imply  much  readjustment  of  the  life; 
nor,  as  we  have  said,  need  it  imply  remorse  for  the  past. 
(There  may  be  a  sudden  moral  conversion  or  total 
reform,  such  as  the  Stoics  believed  in,  without  much 
stirring  of  the  emotions.  That  is  not  an  evangelical 
conversion.)  When  it  is  what  it  seems,  and  what  it 
ought  to  be,  conversion  will,  however,  raise  the  life — 
and  permanently.  "  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know 
them."  And  it  must  grow  into  all  that  is  according  to 
the  mind  of  God,  of  sorrow  for  past  sin,  and  of  thank- 
fulness for  the  great  salvation. 

The  practical  issues  of  this  chapter  are  matters  not 
so  much  for  the  individual  as  for  the  Christian  com- 
munity. Christian  ethics  presuppose  personal  Chris- 
tianity. But  it  is  a  question  of  vast  importance :  what 
is  our  duty  (and  privilege)  in  the  way  of  helping,  by  the 
grace  of  God,  to  awaken  Christian  life  in  others  ? 

(1)  Christian  nurture,  in  the  highest  and  fullest  sense, 
during  childhood  and  youth,  ought  to  bring  children 
into  the  kingdom  of  God  and  keep  them  there. 

(2)  Special  opportunity  must  be  presented  at  the  age 
when  youth  passes  into  maturity.     Churches  which  use 


THE    CHRISTIAN    LIFE  103 

a  rite  of  confirmation  must  be  on  their  guard  against 
letting  the  rite  prove  a  mere  form ;  evangelical  Churches 
must  be  on  their  guard  against  letting  the  young  souls 
be  over-pressured  by  revival  methods ;  for  these  have 
their  dangers.  And  yet  the  Spirit  of  God,  working 
among  us,  consents  to  use  these  methods.  (A  cate- 
chumens' or  young  communicants'  class  is  a  promising 
supplement.) 

(3)  If  Christian  nurture  is  imperfect,  and  conversion 
as  we  know  it  does  not  always  imply  depth  of  experience, 
we  must  make  the  more  of  the  subsequent  stages  of 
Christian  life.  Let  our  Christian  teaching  be  genuine, 
we  shall  grow  up  into  our  Head. 

(4)  In  saying  that  it  is  possible  to  yield  to  the  Gospel, 
we  do  not  deny  that  it  gets  harder  and  harder  as  life 
advances ;  nor  do  we  assert  that  it  is  ever  easy.  Yet 
opportunity  must  be  renewed — again  and  again  and 
again. 

(5)  By  whatever  history  the  Christian  life  arises, 
what  is  essential  is  that  it  should  be  in  existence  within 
us — the  real  supernatural  life  of  God  in  the  soul  of 
man,  coming  from  Christ  through  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  bringing  its  unique  gifts  of  power  and  peace 
and  joy. 

What  follows  is  perhaps  an  expression  of  individual 
opinion. 

(6)  Sacraments  are  to  be  viewed  as  real  helps  in  the 


104  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

divine  life,  always  on  the  presupposition  that  they  are 
not  viewed  as  the  exclusive  channels  of  God's  operation. 
Faith  saves  ;  sacraments  help. 

(7)  Infant  baptism,  however  seemly  in  itself,  ought 
not  to  be  called  a  sacrament. 


CHAPTER   XII 

OUR   RELATION   TO   GOD   IN   THE 
NEW   LIFE 

It  is  possible  to  speak  about  the  beginning  of  the  new 
life,  as  we  have  done  in  last  chapter,  without  ever 
asking  what  the  nature  of  the  new  life  is.  If  now  we  try 
to  offer  a  preliminary  definition,  we  might  say  that  the 
peculiarity  of  Christian  obedience  consists  in  doing  with 
pleasure  what  has  to  be  done.  This  follows  from  the 
very  conception  of  religious  goodness.  Even  Paganism 
thought  it  a  bad  omen  if  an  animal  victim  went  reluctantly 
to  be  sacrificed ;  and  we,  who  have  been  taught  that 
morality  is  religion  and  religion  morality,  cannot  offer 
our  living  sacrifices  in  God's  eternal  temple  unless  we 
obey  with  goodwill  from  the  heart  (Eph.  vi.  6,  7).  "  My 
meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  Me,"  said  our 
Lord  (John  iv.  34) ;  that  remained  true  even  when  He 
had  Himself  to  pray,  "  Not  My  will  but  Thine  be  done  ; " 
His  deepest  desire  was  unshaken,  that  God  might  be 
glorified.     In  the  knowledge  of  God  as  our  Father — in 


106  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

the  first  kindling  (p.  102)  of  our  affections  towards  Him 
and  towards  the  Lord  Christ — there  lies  the  promise  and 
potency  of  the  new  life  which  overcomes  the  world 
because  it  is  begotten  of  God  (I.  John  v.  4). 

Our  relation  to  God  in  this  new  life  can  be  interpreted 
from  different  points  of  view.  First,  we  may  name 
Probation.  This  may  seem  an  unexpected  corollary  to 
the  revelation  of  Fatherhood ;  yet  it  lies  in  our  path, 
not  to  be  evaded.  "We  call  on  Him  as  Father,  who 
without  respect  of  persons  judgeth  according  to  every 
man's  work  "  (I.  Pet.  i.  17,  R.V.).  Christ's  own  teaching 
plainly  lays  stress  on  this,  especially  the  teaching  given 
in  view  of  His  departure  from  earth  and  of  His  promised 
return  to  judge  and  save  (p.  54).  If  there  is  no  probation, 
neither  is  there  any  responsibility ;  without  responsi- 
bility we  can  have  neither  freedom  nor  morality.  It  is 
possible  to  hold  with  dogmatic  universalism  that  our 
responsibility  exists  but  is  limited.  Souls  may  be  earlier 
or  later  in  arriving,  but  in  the  end  all  must  reach 
salvation  ;  we  may  get  more  or  less  of  the  children's 
bread,  but  in  the  end  all  shall  sit  down  to  some  portion 
of  it  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  In  this  reduced  sense, 
and  no  further,  dogmatic  universalism  asserts  human 
probation. 

We  are  not  concerned  in  this  little  book  with  dis- 
puted doctrines,  apart  from  the  one  concern — to  make 
sure  that  doctrine  is,  in  the  full  Christian  sense,  ethical. 


OUR    RELATION    TO    GOD        107 

But  that  consideration  settles  the  matter.  It  seems 
impossible  that  we  should  acquiesce  in  dogmatic  uni- 
versalism.  Whatever  God's  hidden  purpose  of  mercy 
may  conceivably  be,  His  revealed  purpose  is  clear — 
He  will  judge  men  according  to  their  works.  The  New 
Testament  states  no  limitations  to  the  doctrine  of  our 
probation.  It  remains  a  glorious  if  an  awful  truth. 
The  infinite  gulf  between  right  and  wrong  would  be 
hidden  by  treacherous  mists  if  we  ceased  to  think  of 
the  infinite  contrast  between  heaven  and  the  outer  dark- 
ness. This  solemn  truth  of  our  responsibility  is  the 
special  moral  message  of  Bishop  Butler's  Analogy. 

A  higher  conception  of  God's  relation  to  His  children 
is  offered  in  the  thought  of  life  as  a  Divine  education. 
This  view  of  life  was  impressively  taught  by  Thomas 
Erskine  of  Linlathen,  though,  as  a  convinced  universalist, 
he  offered  the  new  thought  not  as  a  supplement  to  the 
last  but  as  a  substitute  for  it,  in  conscious  dissent  from 
Butler  ("Education,  not  Probation"  in  The  Spiritual 
Order).  Butler  in  his  own  way  had  made  room  for  the 
thought  of  education  too.  His  chapter  "  Of  a  State  of 
Probation  as  implying  Trials,  Difficulties  and  Dangers  " 
is  followed  by  one  "  Of  a  State  of  Probation  as  imply- 
ing Moral  Discipline  and  Improvement,"  i.e.  education. 
There  are  two  errors  into  which  Butler  seems  to  fall. 
First,  he  compares  this  life  and  the  Hereafter  to 
education  in  youth  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  work  of 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


manhood  on  the  other  hand.  But  there  is  no  such 
discontinuity  in  true  moral  education.  We  are  learners 
as  long  as  we  live.  And  therefore,  also,  moral  education 
stretches  on  from  this  life  into  the  next.  We  have 
not  simply  two  things  "analogous"  to  each  other,  as 
Butler's  argument  assumes ;  we  have  one  expanding 
glory.  Secondly,  Butler's  conception  of  education  is  too 
narrowly  self-education.  That  God  or  Christ  or  the 
Holy  Spirit  teaches  us,  helps  our  infirmities,  saves  us, 
he  hardly  ever  calls  to  mind.  "No  more  is  required" 
of  us,  he  says  in  one  amazing  sentence,  "  than  what  we 
are  well  able  to  do"  (Analogy,  Pt.  I.,  chap.  iv.).  The 
truth  gains  immensely  when  we  remember  that,  while 
we  are  called  to  self-education — no  education  can  take 
place  until  the  pupil's  heart  is  enlisted — we  have  the 
best  of  teachers,  inwardly  as  well  as  outwardly.  "  I  am 
the  true  vine,  and  My  Father  is  the  husbandman.  .  .  . 
Abide  in  Me."  Even  what  we  speak  of  as  circumstance 
is  divinely  appointed  for  us.  God  plans  it  for  framing 
us  into  that  precise  type  of  goodness  (and  happiness) 
which  He  allots  to  each  of  us.  The  law  of  duty,  applied 
to  our  special  position  and  experience,  as  God  deter- 
mines these,  comes  to  constitute  a  personal  vocation  (cf. 
p.  114,  &c).  For  this  and  through  this  God  trains  us. 
While  the  conceptions  of  probation  and  education 
are  in  some  respects  sharply  divergent,  in  other  respects 
they  coincide.     Thus  both  of  them  look  to  the  future 


OUR    RELATION    TO    GOD        109 

— probation  almost  exclusively  to  a  supernatural  future 
discontinuous  with  the  present  life;  education,  more 
equally  to  the  near  and  to  the  remote  or  supernatural 
future ;  yet  both  looking  forward.  Again,  probation  and 
education  are  alike  in  being  intensely  personal.  One 
concentrates  upon  my  own  salvation;  the  other  upon 
my  own  acquirement  of  a  trained  and  noble  character. 

Over  against  both  we  place  the  conception  of  life  as 
service,  i.e.  as  "  doing  the  will  of  God"  (cf.  pp.  44,  48, 
84).  We  are  probably  safe  in  calling  this  the  master- 
thought  in  Christ's  own  ethical  teaching.  It  focuses 
attention  not  upon  any  future  but  on  the  present,  its 
golden  opportunities  that  are  passing  and  may  never 
return  again.  It  makes  continuity  absolute.  "  As  in 
heaven,  so  on  earth"  (Matt.  vi.  10,  R.V.)  is  the  desire 
addressed  to  God  in  the  Lord's  Prayer.  And  as  on 
earth  so  in  heaven  God's  "  servants  shall  do  Him 
service  "  (Rev.  xxii.  3,  R.V.).  Moreover,  the  thought  of 
personal  salvation  or  of  supreme  personal  excellence 
gives  place  to  the  thought  of  God's  will.  True,  the 
service  spoken  of  is  service  done  to  God.  It  is  not  yet 
defined  as  service  to  the  community  or  to  our  fellows. 
But  we  know  that  Christ's  teaching  makes  that  iden- 
tification absolute  (cf  pp.  54-55).  This,  therefore,  is 
the  highest  and  deepest  view  of  the  Christian  life. 

Although  the  three  views  of  life  now  enumerated 
differ,    they    are    not    opposed    to    each    other,    but 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


rather  complementary.  Even  if  one  of  them  may 
justly  seem  higher  than  the  rest,  it  does  not  claim  a 
monopoly  ;  we  are  to  find  room  in  our  thoughts  and 
feelings  for  them  all.  We  know  how  Christ  spoke  of 
judgment,  of  reward,  of  our  probation  in  view  of  judg- 
ment and  its  issues.  None  of  us  is  safe  in  forgetting 
during  a  single  day  that  we  must  give  in  our  account 
at  the  judgment-seat  of  God.  St.  Paul,  supremely  the 
apostle  of  grace,  strikes  the  note  of  responsibility  again 
and  again  (e.g.  I.  Cor.  iv.  4;  II.  Cor.  v.  10).  And  we 
could  scarcely  live,  especially  through  days  of  trouble, 
but  for  the  assurance  that  sorrow  itself  is  a  tool  in  God's 
hand  moulding  us  for  a  better  and  happier  future.  But 
least  of  all  must  we  omit  to  learn  from  our  Lord  how  we 
are  to  love  the  will  of  God  because  of  what  it  is — God's 
will  (Ps.  xl.  8  ;  Matt.  xi.  25,  26). 

Even  a  brief  ethical  primer  cannot  leave  the  question 
of  our  relation  to  God  in  the  new  life  without  speaking 
of  that  duty  and  privilege  of  Divine  communion  which 
has  its  centre  in  prayer.  Worship,  sacraments,  Christian 
teaching,  obedient  dutifulness,  the  discipline  of  trial — 
all  converge  on  this  point.  Christ's  own  teaching  (Matt, 
vi.)  throws  personal  prayer  into  a  secret  place.  That 
seems  forgotten  by  sentimental  travellers,  who  praise 
what  we  may  well  call  the  "knee  drill"  of  Moham- 
medans and  disparage  the  reticence  and  reserve  which 
Christ   has   taught    His   disciples.     Nothing   is  harder 


OUR    RELATION    TO    GOD        in 

than  really  to  pray ;  nor  is  anything  more  strengthening 
to  one  whose  heart  is  yielded  up  to  the  service  of  God 
and  men. 

Fasting  has  a  very  long  history  in  religion ;  but,  as  a 
means  of  drawing  near  to  the  God  who  is  revealed  as 
our  Father,  it  cannot  be  unreservedly  approved.  As 
a  means  of  self-discipline,  it  is  best  translated  from 
occasional  self-mortification  to  habitual  self-control.  If 
it  is  to  be  practised  for  the  sake  of  raising  funds  ("  self- 
denial  weeks  "),  it  is  an  emergency  method  and  must 
not  be  overdone. 


CHAPTER   XIII 

CHRISTIAN    DUTIES 

Even  the  highest  definitions  of  our  moral  relation  to 
God  in  the  new  life  have  left  us  so  far  with  a  somewhat 
indefinite  view  of  its  contents.  We  are  to  do  God's 
will ;  but  what  precisely — as  precisely  as  this  great 
question  can  be  answered — is  God's  will  for  us?  We 
ought  to  reach  a  further  answer  by  analysing  duty.  In 
other  words,  we  shall  find  that  the  contents  of  God's 
will  for  us  are  interpreted  in  the  light  of  our  relations  to 
our  fellows  and  our  responsibility  for  self  (p.  119). 

Duty  and  Love.  We  must  concede  that  duty  is 
hardly  in  strictness  one  of  the  Bible  words  for  describ- 
ing Christ's  service.  (Yet  see  Luke  xvii.  10,  E.V.)  It  is 
borrowed  from  philosophy,  in  which  it  arose  or  became 
prominent  under  Stoicism.  Still,  if  our  Lord's  own 
teaching  inculcates  responsibility  and  probation,  there 
is  hardly  more  than  a  change  from  one  synonym  to 
another  when  we  speak  of  "duty."  Though  God  is  our 
Father,  He  is  the  Father  who  judges  (I.  Pet.  i.  17). 


CHRISTIAN    DUTIES  113 

Though  we  are  sons  of  God,  we  are  pledged  to  serve 
His  holy  will. 

It  may  seem  as  if  a  revelation  of  love  raised  us  above 
the  realm  of  duty.  The  writer  can  remember  with  what 
contempt  D.  L.  Moody,  the  great  evangelist,  spoke  of 
"  duty  "  as  a  poor  and  mean  description  of  a  Christian's 
calling.  Now  Moody  was  a  man  of  the  highest  Chris- 
tian worth,  yet  in  this  he  spoke  unwisely.  The  love 
of  God  is  to  keep  His  Commandments  (I.  John  v.  3). 
Truly  they  are  not  grievous,  yet  at  times  they  must  seem 
so.  Perfect  purity  may  lament  to  God  with  strong 
crying  and  tears,  and  yet  the  cup  not  pass.  Words- 
worth's Ode  to  Duty — if  less  than  evangelical  in  its  view 
of  the  motives  which  make  us  flee  for  refuge  to  lay  hold 
upon  a  Divine  hope — is  soundly  Christian  in  its  con- 
ception of  the  solemn  though  glad  service  which  duty 
exacts. 

Duty  and  Virtue.  In  the  next  chapter  we  shall  dis- 
cuss the  Christian  calling  under  the  heading  of  "  Virtue." 
Duties  are  acts  ;  virtues  are  habits,  states  of  character, 
graces.  Again,  duty  affirms  what  we  must  do,  or  else 
it  forbids  the  things  we  dare  not  do.  Thus  it  tells  us 
what  is  evil.  Virtue,  on  the  other  hand,  says  :  This 
or  that  is  positively  good.  According  to  the  vulgar 
apprehension,  stereotyped  in  Roman  Catholicism,  duty 
tells  us  what  is  the  irreducible  minimum  required  by 
law,   while  virtue  tells  us   of  supererogatory  goodness 

H 


ii4  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

outrunning  duty  and  constituting  merit.  Protestantism 
and  the  Gospel  itself  (Luke  xvii.  10)  protest  against  this. 
All  goodness  is  of  a  piece ;  and  there  is  no  merit  any- 
where if  we  see  clear  and  look  deep.  What  is  true 
in  these  suggestions  is  just  this,  that  duty,  with  what 
Kant  called  its  "categorical  imperative,"  stands  for  the 
aspect  of  goodness  which  is  absolute.  Or — to  repeat 
the  same  statement  in  other  words — duty  stands  for  the 
universal  aspect  of  moral  requirement.  If  any  other 
person  stood  in  precisely  my  present  place,  what  is  my 
duty  would  be  precisely  his.  Hence,  duty  is  very  fre- 
quently said  to  be  what  is  demanded  by  the  moral  law. 
The  right  is  unconditionally  binding ;  it  enforces  itself 
"  without  respect  of  persons."  Still  many  grave  errors 
may  arise  from  speaking  about  moral  law  (pp.  44, 
45).  Our  Lord  does  not  speak  of  "law";  St.  Paul 
repudiates  it. 

Duty  and  Vocation.  While  duty  stands  for  a  uni- 
versal element,  there  is  a  personal  element  in  moral 
requirement  which  may  be  called  vocation.  This  word 
suggests  several  things.  Dr.  H.  Rashdall  has  lately 
criticised  moralists  for  neglecting  so  grave  a  matter 
as  the  choice  of  a  profession  or  life-work.  Different 
principles  might  be  appealed  to  for  guidance.  What 
attracts  the  person  who  has  to  make  the  choice  ?  Few 
men  can  do  their  best  work  if  they  are  "  square  pegs  in 
round  holes."     And  assuredly  the  parent  who  settles  his 


CHRISTIAN    DUTIES  115 

child's  career  tyrannically,  according  to  the  parent's  prin- 
ciples— or,  worse  still,  according  to  the  parent's  taste  or 
mere  predilection — acts  an  un-Christian  part.  Secondly, 
Where  can  I  do  the  most  good  to  others?  The 
writer  remembers  how  his  own  father  used  to  declare 
that,  had  he  not  been  a  Christian  minister,  he  must 
have  become  a  physician,  as  the  next  best  way  of  doing 
good.  Thirdly,  Where  shall  I  be  safest  from  moral 
dangers,  for  myself  and  for  those  who  may  come  to 
belong  to  my  circle  ?  "  Lot  beheld  all  the  plain  of 
Jordan,  that  it  was  well  watered.  So  Lot  chose  him 
all  the  plain  of  Jordan.  But  the  men  of  Sodom  were 
wicked  exceedingly."  Fourthly,  What  can  I  get  ?  In 
more  religious  language,  What  options  does  God  permit 
me?  No  possible  casuistry  can  tell  us  how  these 
various  considerations  are  to  be  harmonised,  or  subordi- 
nated one  to  another,  upon  a  universal  plan.  Personal 
choice  is  a  personal  duty,  to  be  discharged  in  God's 
sight.  Outward  helps  and  hindrances  are  part  of  our 
Father's  will,  and  the  meaning  of  that  will  is  uniformly 
good.  In  what  otherwise  seems  a  most  awkward 
misfit,  we  can  serve  God  and  follow  Christ.  Yet, 
within  the  range  of  possible  choice,  we  must  select 
wisely.  The  best  must  be  made  of  ourselves,  not  the 
least. 

Similar  decisions  have  to  be  repeated  over  and  over 
again  on  a  smaller  scale.     What  is  in  point  of  duty  my 


ii6  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

vocation?  First  among  all  personal  duties  we  must 
do  faithfully,  as  for  God,  our  professional  life-work. 
Next,  the  opportunities  which  open  up  from  this  life- 
work  have  a  special  claim  on  us.  It  is  better  to  be 
a  considerate  employer,  in  home  or  workshop,  at  the 
cost  of  giving  less  cash  to  good  causes,  or  even,  it  may 
be,  of  giving  less  time  to  philanthropy,  than  to  shine 
in  the  esteem  of  those  far  off,  but  neglect  the  work  that 
lies  nearest  us.  And  yet,  further  still,  it  is  good  to  do 
some  free-will  service,  independently  of  professional 
tasks.  The  rule  is,  "As  we  have  opportunity."  God 
asks  no  impossibilities  ;  but  He  does  ask  the  seeing  eye, 
with  the  loving  heart  behind  it,  to  discern  opportunity 
and  embrace  it.  If  I  cannot  swim,  it  is  no  duty  of 
mine  to  rescue  one  drowning  in  deep  water.  Yet  if 
there  is  some  chance  of  success,  though  small,  and  if 
no  one  else  is  near?  It  is  not  my  duty,  if  morally 
immature,  to  volunteer  for  heroic  moral  tasks  {e.g. 
counselling  and  reclaiming  a  neighbour  who  is  falling 
into  the  grip  of  vice).     Yet,  if  there  is  no  one  else  ? 

Duty  and  the  sphere  of  the  permissible.  Is  there 
any  part  of  life — we  speak,  of  course,  specially  as 
Christians — that  is  morally  colourless?  It  is  not  fair 
to  pretend  that  we  are  always  at  the  cross-roads,  making 
the  choice  of  Hercules  ;  though  sometimes  we  are.  The 
old  bad  legal  traditions  hint  (p.  24)  that,  so  long  as 
we    respect   the   limits   authoritatively    laid   down,    we 


CHRISTIAN    DUTIES  117 

are  "permitted"  within  these  to  act  as  we  please. 
Christianity  will  have  no  complicity  with  such  a  creed. 
But  can  duty  regulate  every  minute  detail  in  life?  Even 
the  austere  Kant  spoke  of  "duties  of  imperfect  obliga- 
tion," though  surely  he  might  as  well  have  said,  duties 
which  are  not  quite  duty  at  all !  Still,  is  there  any 
moral  significance  in  taking  one  street  rather  than  the 
next  parallel  street  when  I  am  walking  to  my  work? 
Mr.  F.  H.  Bradley  once  suggested  that  it  might  be  a 
duty  not  to  press  the  conception  of  duty  unduly.  If 
we  remember  that  the  duty  of  serving  God  is  permanent, 
we  ought  to  cultivate  a  habit  of  prompt  decision  on 
small  points,  where  no  ground  of  moral  preference  can 
be  detected.  We  are  not  to  be  children  or  slaves.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  doubtful  whether  this  can  fairly  be 
called  a  region  of  permissible  action. 

In  graver  things  the  conception  of  the  morally 
permissible  calls  forth  graver  hesitation.  Suppose  I 
have  under  consideration  some  heavy  sacrifice  or  some 
arduous  effort.  No  human  adviser  can  tell  me  with 
authority  that  I  am  pledged  and  bound  to  the  more 
painful  alternative.  Is  it,  then,  morally  "  permissible  "  to 
take  the  lower  path,  if  I  so  decide?  Surely  not.  The 
contemplated  sacrifice  or  effort  either  is  God's  will  for 
me — in  which  case  I  ought  to  perceive  that,  and  act 
upon  the  knowledge — or  else  it  is  not  God's  will  for 
me,  and,  therefore,  is  not  duty  at  all.     Immense  diffi- 


n8  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

culties  meet  us  in  applying  this  principle ;  but  the 
principle  itself  is  plain,  and  difficulties  rightly  en- 
countered educate  the  mind.  To  have  needlessly  in 
self-indulgence  chosen  the  lower  path  leaves  a  bad  blot 
upon  memory  and  conscience. 

An  innocent  meaning  for  the  "permissible"  is  found 
by  Dr.  Herrmann,  who  identifies  it  with  amusement. 
We  are  too  weak  to  do  without  recreation;  and  Dr. 
Herrmann  seems  to  view  it  as  nothing  better  than  a 
concession  to  our  weakness.  Perhaps  this  judgment  is 
a  shade  stern.  There  may  be  a  real  duty  of  taking 
(some  reasonable)  recreation — not,  of  course,  a  duty  of 
throwing  ourselves  into  this  or  that  particular  pleasure. 
Can  we  ask  God's  blessing  upon  recreation  ?  Can  we 
not  be  amused  to  the  glory  of  God  and  to  the  recupera- 
tion of  moral  strength  ?  If  we  can,  there  is  no  room  for 
describing  relaxation  as  a  thing  merely  permissible.  It 
is  among  God's  holy  gifts  to  us,  though  among  the 
smaller.     Other  recreation  is  unsafe  and  unlawful. 

On  the  whole  we  conclude  that  the  idea  of  a  realm 
of  the  permissible  in  contrast  to  duty,  properly  so  called, 
is  a  delusion,  and  one  not  free  from  danger. 

Division  of  Duties.  The  Church  of  England  cate- 
chism, following  the  letter  of  Christ's  teaching  (as  to  the 
Old  Testament  "  law  "),  divides  in  two — duty  to  God, 
duty  to  my  neighbour.  Text-books  have  often  divided 
into  three — duty  to  self,  to  my  neighbour,  to  God.     It 


CHRISTIAN    DUTIES  119 

is  very  doubtful  whether  these  divisions  help  us.  All 
duty  is  duty  to  God ;  and  it  might  be  possible  to  add 
that  all  duty  is  duty  to  self  (I.  Tim.  iv.  16),  and — if 
perhaps  in  some  cases  less  directly,  yet — is  duty  to  our 
neighbours  too  !  Duty  is  nothing  else  than  a  harmony 
in  the  recognition  of  God's  will — a  harmony  of  our  own 
true  good  with  the  true  good  of  others.  Still  it  might 
be  possible  to  concede  this,  and  yet  plead  for  a  classifi- 
cation of  duties  according  as  one  or  other  element  was 
more  prominent  in  each  case.  Dr.  Newman  Smyth's  lan- 
guage may  point  in  this  direction  ;  he  distinguishes  duties 
to  self  as  a  moral  end — and  so  on  (the  threefold  division). 
A  twofold  division  seems  best,  if  we  frame  it  differently 
— duties  with  special  regard  to  self  and  to  others.  We 
hold  that 'both  alike  are  "duties  to  God,"  and  that  "  re- 
ligious duties  "  of  prayer,  &c,  are  not  uniquely  sacred 
— if  uniquely  prominent,  they  are  so  as  special  privileges 
rather  than  as  special  duties  (above,  p.fno). 

In  regard  to  self.  I  am  myself  part  of  the  moral 
whole  and  an  element  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  It 
must  be  peculiarly  my  responsibility  to  keep  this  part  of 
the  Lord's  garden  fruitful  and  clear  of  weeds.  To  pre- 
serve life  and  shun  suicide  ;  to  preserve  and  secure  health 
(unless  it  be  God's  will  that  I  should  imperil  health  from 
an  adequate  motive),  these  are  duties  specially  noted 
here  by  Dr.  Newman  Smyth.  (Surely  it  is  not  because 
I  am  a  moral  end  that  my  life  and  health  are  significant ! 


i2o  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

Life  and  health  are  needed  for  the  service  of  God  and 
man.) 

A  difficult  point  to  handle  in  connection  with  personal 
duty  is  the  claim  of  what  we  describe  in  a  more  special 
sense  as  purity.  In  regard  to  this,  a  few  words  of  Dr. 
Herrmann's  may  be  quoted  in  free  translation.  "  The 
family,  which  furnishes  the  conditions  for  the  very  best 
exercise  of  mutual  love,  is  rooted  in  the  strongest  of  all 
natural  impulses,  that  of  sex — an  impulse  in  which  the 
species  makes  the  individual  serve  its  ends.  But  in  a 
true  marriage  moral  individuality  is  not  submerged  but 
glorified;  there  is  no  such  inward  moral  fellowship  as 
that  of  a  husband  and  wife  who  are  worthy  of  their 
calling.  Hence  every  one  fights  in  defence  of  the  family 
who  secures  spiritual  mastery  over  the  natural  impulse  of 
sex.  And  every  one  who  deserves — perhaps  in  married 
life  itself — to  be  called  unchaste  or  immodest  is  doing 
his  utmost  to  rob  mankind  of  the  blessings  of  the  home, 
to  make  the  flesh  master  of  the  spirit,  and  thus  to 
destroy  the  family."  Under  stress  of  temptation  "we 
may  sometimes  wish  that  sex  could  be  abolished  alto- 
gether." Too  much  "  sham  holiness  "  has  prevailed  in  the 
Christian  Church  under  the  influence  of  such  thoughts. 
"  When  thus  disguised,  evil  is  worst  of  all.  The  plain 
fact  is  that  God  has  willed  human  nature  to  be  what  it 
is — with  all  the  joy  of  which  sex  may  become  the  vehicle 
and  occasion,  and  with  all  the  burdens  that  it  imposes." 


CHRISTIAN    DUTIES 


From  self-maintenance  (and  self-control,  which  for  us 
means  control  by  the  indwelling  Spirit  of  our  Lord) 
we  pass  on  to  speak  of  self- development — physical, 
mental,  aesthetic.  Our  physical  being  is  part  of  that 
natural  order  which  God's  providence  presupposes  and 
upon  which  His  grace  works.  Clearer  still  is  the  duty 
of  self-culture  in  mental  and  aesthetic  regions.1  It  is 
no  pleasure  to  our  God  that  His  servants  should  have 
dull  and  ill-stored  minds.  Amusement  (p.  118)  rises  in 
rank  and  worth  when  it  becomes  refining  as  well  as 
recreative.  Almost  all  of  us  err  by  neglecting  good 
music  and  good  poetry ;  we  know  their  value,  but 
poorer  things  thrust  them  aside.  On  the  other  hand, 
great  art  loses  in  recreative  quality.  It  tasks  and 
exhausts. 

Yet  here  again  circumstances,  divinely  appointed  for 
us,  speak  their  No  as  well  as  their  Yes.  And  the 
pruning-knife  does  as  much  for  development  as  the 
forcing-house.  We  cannot  specialise  in  everything  at 
once.  How  many  rosebuds  must  be  pinched  off  to 
make  the  perfect  rose  !  What  rule  is  possible  ?  We 
must  start  from  the  best  custom  of  our  time  and 
circle,  making  modifications  for  our  own  needs  (or  in 
accordance  with  clear  principles  of  our  own  belief). 
We  must  seek  wisdom,  and  we  must  not  lose  sim- 
plicity. Things  good  per  se  are  bad  for  us  if  they 
1  See  Dr.  Kilpatrick's  Christian  Character. 


122  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

overburden  our  powers.     Spiritually  how  weak  we  are! 
The  highest  self-culture  is  spiritual. 

In  regard  to  others.  We  are  not  speaking  now  of 
duties  in  the  particular  social  spheres  (chap.  xv.).  Apart 
from  these,  as  well  as  within  them,  we  recognise  duties 
towards  others  of  justice,  considerateness,  and  kind- 
ness or  love. 

Justice  is  first  a  limit.  Positively,  I  am  to  pay  my 
plighted  dues.  Negatively,  I  must  not  exact  what  goes 
beyond  my  rights.  "Not  more  than  an  eye  for  an  eye," 
said  the  Old  Testament.  Not  more  than  his  rights 
may  a  Christian  claim !  Shall  he  claim  less  ?  Crazy 
altruism  tells  us  to  claim  nothing  at  all.  Yet  in  many 
cases  it  is  good  for  my  neighbour  that  my  claim  be 
gently  but  firmly  pressed.  Is  it  right  to  let  a  pupil 
scamp  his  work,  unchecked?  If  not — then  is  it  right 
to  let  a  tradesman  do  so?  Our  error  is  not  in  assert- 
ing rights,  but  in  stopping  short  with  that  assertion. 
Rights  are  real  things :  but  duty  stands  above  all  our 
mutual  claims,  and  the  full  interpretation  of  duty  is  God. 
The  just  act  and  the  kind  act  may  sometimes  seem  to 
differ ;  but  the  spirit  of  justice  is  the  spirit  of  love. 
Loveless  justice  is  not  merely  unloving — it  is  unjust. 
Hence,  justice  must  be  associated  with  considerateness 
if  it  is  not  to  be  Shylock-like ;  and  love  has  no  limit 
except  that  of  working  "  as  we  have  opportunity."  In  the 
nature  of  things  we  cannot  define  in  advance  how  much 


CHRISTIAN    DUTIES  123 

considerateness  is  due  from  us  to  others.  Does  that 
make  it  less  a  duty  ?  We  are  to  be  free  men  ;  we  are 
not  to  be  children;  or — shall  we  say? — we  are  to  be 
God's  children.  His  law  must  be  written  on  our  hearts ; 
its  meaning  must  be  felt  out  wisely  and  patiently  in 
action.  Nothing  else  than  love  on  our  part  can  fulfil 
God's  requirement.  To  fail  in  love  is  rebellion  against 
Him.     And  we  must  love  our  fellows'  souls. 


CHAPTER   XIV 

CHRISTIAN   VIRTUES 

Traditionally,  the  Christian  or  Catholic  Church  has 
reckoned  up  seven  "  principal  "  virtues — four  borrowed 
from  Greek  philosophy,  the  "  cardinal n  virtues  of 
courage,  self-control,  wisdom  or  prudence,  and  justice ; 
three  added  from  St.  Paul,  notably  from  the  great  out- 
burst in  I.  Cor.  xiii.  13,  Faith,  Hope,  Love — the  "  Chris- 
tian graces."  The  first  four  are  supposed  to  be  natural, 
the  last  three  supernatural.  (Over  against  the  seven 
virtues  Catholic  teaching  came  to  place  seven  Deadly 
Sins — deadly  in  contrast  with  "  venial  "  wrong-doing.) 
This  is  an  unsatisfactory  fashion  of  clamping  together 
different  things.  Nor  is  it  certain  that  ethically  faith,  hope, 
and  love  form  a  good  summary  of  Christian  excellences. 
Only  one  of  these — love — is  properly  an  ethical  virtue. 
Still,  we  might  bring  these  seven  virtues  into  relation 
with  the  traditional  threefold  division  of  Christian  duties 
(p.  118).  Courage,  temperance,  prudence  refer  chiefly 
to  self ;  justice  to  human  society ;  faith,  hope,  and  love 


CHRISTIAN    VIRTUES  125 

to  God.  But  we  should  have  to  add  that  justice  involves 
love  (p.  122),  and  we  should  have  to  take  love  as  love 
to  man  no  less  than  as  love  to  God.  Faith  or  trust  is 
central  in  the  religious  relation;  love  is  central  in 
conduct. 

Let  us  begin  with  courage.  It  is  known  to  us  primarily 
as  the  soldier's  virtue.  We  might  be  tempted  to  place 
it  lowest  among  all  virtues  ;  but  certain  it  is  that  no  one 
can  make  even  a  tolerable  passage  across  the  stage  of 
life  without  it.  We  need  its  lower  forms — physical 
courage,  readiness,  nerve — and  we  must  add  to  these 
moral  courage.  It  might  seem  as  if  this  virtue  of 
courage  were  inconsistent  with  another  primary  virtue 
of  the  Christian  life — moral  sensitiveness,  or  what 
Thomas  Arnold  of  Rugby  termed  "moral  thoughtful- 
ness."  The  man  who  thinks  little  of  pain  may  under- 
estimate his  failures  and  so  "  despise  God's  chastenings." 
Timid  minds  will  learn  more  readily;  and  Christ 
announces  hope  for  the  weak.  Again,  courage  may 
blunt  the  sympathies.  Why  do  these  weaklings  writhe 
in  pain  ?  I,  the  strong,  brave  man,  don't !  But  there  is 
no  real  antagonism  between  the  several  Christian  virtues. 
We  must  rise  into  a  higher  region,  where  courage  is 
inspired  by  faith.  In  God  we  boast,  but  not  in  our- 
selves. Supernatural  resources  amid  conscious  weak- 
ness must  make  us  strong.  Sensitiveness  to  the  Divine 
education  is  no  excuse  for  cowardice  in  Christians. 


i26  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

Temperance  or  self-control  is  akin  to  courage.  It 
disregards  clamorous  pleasure,  as  courage  disregards 
clamorous  pain.  In  another  respect  this  virtue  calls  for 
notice;  it  is  one  for  whose  exercise  no  precise  limits 
can  be  laid  down  in  advance  or  prescribed  from  outside. 
It  is  somewhat  to  be  regretted  that  we  employ  the  word 
temperance  so  much  for  the  habit  of  abstaining  from 
all  use  of  strong  drink.  Wise  and  Christian  as  we  may 
deem  that  policy  (p.  151),  we  shall  err  gravely  if  we  let 
the  thought  of  Temperance — in  its  true  meaning  as  self- 
control — disappear  from  our  minds.  It  is  true  that, 
as  moral  evolution  advances,  the  requirements  of  self- 
control  rise.  A  Greek  might  be  called  "  temperate  "  for 
no  better  reason  (it  has  been  pointed  out)  than  modera- 
tion in  sensuality.  Christ's  law  of  purity  is  immensely 
more  stringent,  and  Christian  motives,  too,  are  pro- 
foundly more  powerful.  Yet  in  the  end  a  sharp  policy 
of  abstinence  will  fail  us — somewhere.  Right  and 
wise  balance  between  less  and  more,  in  many  different 
regions  of  life,  must  evince  the  presence  of  living 
Christian  goodness,  and  rebut  the  charge  of  dead 
mechanical  legalism.  This  is  notably  true  in  regard  to 
pleasures  (pp.  118,  121). 

Wisdom  again  might  rank  as  the  lowest  of  virtues  if 
we  took  it  in  the  sense  of  mere  prudence  and  sagacious 
self-regard.  Prudence  is  a  half- virtue  (p.  134).  Yet  it 
is  an  advance  upon  living  at  random,  or  upon  wasting 


CHRISTIAN    VIRTUE  127 

health  or  means.  Persons  too  readily  speak  with 
contempt  to-day  of  "  selfish  prudence."  They  ought  to 
recognise  that  imprudence  is  more  deeply  selfish.  Its 
effects  are  known  and  certain;  yet  your  "generous" 
nature  will  insist  upon  running  on  the  rocks,  and  be- 
coming salvage  for  the  busy  hands  of  better  men.  And 
in  this  virtue  too  there  are  higher  aspects  as  well  as 
lower.  Wisdom  or  efficiency,  adjusting  means  to  the 
end  in  view,  makes  the  best  of  one's  personal  life.  It  is 
not  to  be  construed — as  Plato  in  characteristically  Greek 
fashion  took  it — as  if  it  were  the  monopoly  of  the  small 
class  of  speculative  thinkers.  Every  life  may  be  wisely 
effective.  And  we  must  advance  further  still  in  analysing 
this  virtue.  Is  a  life  to  be  called  "wise"  indeed,  unless 
we  study,  besides  personal  efficiency,  adjustment  to 
others  ? 

The  brave  self-controlled  wise  man  (or  woman)  has 
first  made  the  best  of  himself;  secondly,  he  has  become 
by  his  virtues  infinitely  more  efficient  as  a  servant  to 
society.  Still,  social  claims,  as  such,  clearly  announce 
themselves  for  the  first  time  by  the  name  of  Justice, 
for  justice  has  no  meaning  at  all  apart  from  society.  In 
his  relations  to  others,  the  good  man  must  be  at  the 
least  just  (p.  122).  This  virtue  demands  equality  of 
distribution  in  some  sense  ;  "just  and  equal "  (Col.  iv.  1). 
Dr.  Rashdall  has  maintained  that  "  equal  consideration  " 
is  what  justice  really  demands,  "  equality  of  conditions  " 


128  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

being  impracticable  and  not  truly  desirable.  The  lowest 
view  of  justice  would  teach  that  I  am  to  be  brave, 
virtuous  and  wise  for  myself,  so  long  as  I  do  not  inter- 
fere with  the  "  rights  "  of  others  (p.  24).  Herbert  Spencer 
divided  social  virtue  into  justice,  negative  beneficence, 
and  positive  beneficence,  with  strong  emphasis  upon 
mere  justice  in  the  narrow  sense  now  explained.  Even 
Kant,  with  his  duties  of  "  perfect "  and  of  "  imperfect 
obligation,"  strikes  a  similar  note.  (It  is  justice  that 
imposes  perfect  obligation.)  Morally,  we  dare  not 
disregard  just  claims;  we  must  be  "just  before  we  are 
generous,"  as  the  saying  goes.  Here  justice  contrasts 
with  temperance  (p.  126).  The  former  is  my  plain 
duty  or  debt,  certain  and  calculable,  if  passing  on  (p.  113) 
from  regulating  actions  to  organise  a  virtue  or  type  of 
character.  But,  as  we  claimed  above  (p.  117),  it  is  an 
error  to  suppose  that  duties,  which  cannot  be  defined  in 
advance  or  formulated  for  others,  cease  to  be  duties 
definitely  required  by  God.  If  we  substitute  for  the 
word  justice  the  higher  synonym  righteousness,  we 
shall  feel  that  this  virtue  demands  from  us  more  than  a 
negative  goodness.  Under  the  higher  name,  justice 
reveals  itself  as  the  central  moral  virtue  incorporating 
wisdom  and  fulfilled  in  love,  which  exhibits  righteous 
motive  victoriously  at  work.  Love  and  justice  or 
righteousness  are  not  two  separate  things.  Love 
fulfils   the    law — that    is   the   relation   between   them ! 


CHRISTIAN    VIRTUES  129 

Yet  we  cannot  omit  separate  consideration  of  the  claims 
of  righteousness.  Love  that  followed  whims,  even 
kindly  whims,  would  not  deserve  its  glorious  name. 
Christian  love  is  under  law  to  the  needs  of  the  brethren 
and  to  the  commands  of  a  righteous  Lord. 

It  has  been  said  in  Ecce  Homo  that  emphasis  upon 
active  virtue  was  Christ's  special  contribution  to  human 
ethics.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  equally  true  that 
ancient  philosophy,  before  the  ruin  of  the  free  cities  and 
the  rise  of  Alexander's  empire,  almost  merged  duty  in 
the  service  of  the  community.  In  these  two  distinct 
forms  the  claims  of  our  fellows  descend  to  us  as  vener- 
able and  authoritative — Christian  and  classical ;  the 
claim  of  individuals  and  the  claim  of  the  common- 
wealth. We  admit  both ;  but  we  cannot  agree  that 
altruistic  enthusiasm  was  Christ's  only  moral  innovation. 
His  deepening  of  the  inner  personal  life  is  no  less  con- 
spicuous and  no  less  revolutionary.  It  is  not  by  acci- 
dent that  the  very  claim  on  behalf  of  others,  which 
Christ  puts  forth,  views  our  fellows  as  our  brethren  and 
sisters,  children  of  the  same  God,  and  not  merely  as  an 
external  society.  And  yet  public  spirit  is  a  duty  too. 
If  the  New  Testament  is  necessarily  all  but  silent  regard- 
ing it,  Dr.  G.  A.  Smith  has  pointed  out  how  much  we 
may  learn  regarding  patriotism  not  only  from  the  classics 
but  from  the  Old  Testament. 

We  now  make  a  further  transition  from  social  to 

1 


i5o  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

definitely  religious  virtues.  But  it  must  be  understood 
that  we  are  not  bidding  farewell  either  to  personal  or  to 
social  goodness.  We  carry  them  on  with  us,  that  they 
may  be  deepened  when  they  are  seen  in  God's  true  light. 

The  fundamental  tone  of  virtue  before  God  is  humility. 
The  lack  of  this,  in  the  very  wisest  teacher  of  antiquity, 
Aristotle,  has  often  been  commented  upon.  Dr.  Rash- 
dall  in  particular  has  a  strong  impression  that  the 
pridefully  "  magnanimous  "  man  depicted  by  Aristotle  is 
utterly  odious.  Even  apart  from  conscious  faith  in 
God,  some  few  rare  spirits  may  be  touched  with  humility 
as  they  catch  sight  of  the  lofty  moral  ideal  and  divine 
the  inadequacy  of  their  own  best  service.  But,  when 
we  know  the  ideal  as  personal  in  God,  and  still  more 
when  we  know  it  as  living  and  human  in  Christ  our 
brother,  humility  becomes  at  once  warmer  and  more 
profound.  In  us  it  must  assume  the  added  colour  of 
repentance.  Without  unreality  and  without  distortion 
of  the  moral  judgment,  we  must  confess  before  God  sins 
recognised  in  our  past  behaviour  or  in  the  very  structure 
of  our  character,  and  sins  darkly  suspected — though  con- 
science has  not  yet  been  able  definitely  to  make  war 
upon  them.  We  claim  no  self-respect  in  our  ruined 
selves,  but  we  regain  it  by  God's  grace. 

A  great  German  theologian,  Albert  Ritschl,  has  insisted 
upon  the  special  place  due  to  patience  in  the  Christian 
life.     We  are  to  submit  to  God's  unwelcome  appoint- 


CHRISTIAN    VIRTUES  131 

ments  in  no  stoical  insensibility.  Felt  and  recognised 
and  accepted,  pain  is  to  be  overcome  through  faith  in 
God  our  Father. 

The  final  religious  virtue  towards  God  is  not  so  much 
love  (cf.  p.  125)  as  thankfulness.  This  was  well  taught 
by  the  Protestant  Reformers.  Yet  they  tended  too 
much  to  speak  of  gratitude  for  mere  pardon ;  as  if,  being 
released  from  penalties  for  the  past,  we  tried  in  gratitude 
to  do  better.  The  Christian  motive  is  wider  than  that. 
Knowing  in  faith  that  we  are  redeemed  from  all  evil,  we 
cannot  but  praise  God  in  our  lives.  We  are  to  "give 
thanks  always  for  all  things  " — how  can  we  ?  "  To  God, 
even  our  Father" — that  is  the  first  answer;  "In  the 
name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ" — that  is  the  final 
answer,  and  that  suffices. 

Such  thankfulness  includes  in  itself  Joy.  The  world 
tells  us  it  is  a  "  duty  "  to  be  "  cheerful " ;  and  the  saying 
is  very  true,  so  far  as  it  goes.  But  the  Christian  inter- 
pretation carries  us  up  to  greater  heights  and  down  to 
profounder  depths.  It  is  our  privilege  as  well  as  our 
duty  to  rejoice  in  God.  This  is  an  important  counter- 
poise to  the  drab  view  of  Christian  goodness  which  too 
much  insistence  upon  humility  and  patience  might  yield. 
Joy  springs  naturally  out  of  thankfulness ;  as  naturally 
as  ingratitude  towards  God  or  men  sours  the  heart. 
And  Christian  joy  looks  beyond  those  precious  lower 
gifts,  which  the  providence  of  God  strews  with  a  boun- 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


tiful  but  intermittent  hand,  to  the  one  sure  and  central 
blessing. 

Another  great  writer,  Bishop  Butler,  dwells  with 
emphasis  upon  "veracity  and  justice."  It  is  well  to 
realise  that  these  also  have  the  quality  of  religious 
virtues.  Butler's  reverence  made  him  dislike  the  easy 
empiricist  ethic  of  the  pleasure  philosophy,  with  its 
favourite  virtues  of  "prudence,"  or,  as  Butler  writes, 
"  rational  self-love,"  and  of  "  benevolence,"  or — as  our 
age  says,  after  Comte — altruism.  In  Butler's  days 
"  rational  self-love "  was  the  fashion,  and  with  a  fine 
scorn  he  accepted  the  situation.  Even  in  commending 
love  towards  others  "there  shall  be,"  he  writes,1  "all 
possible  concessions  made  to  the  favourite  passion  which 
hath  so  much  allowed  to  it,  and  whose  cause  is  so 
universally  pleaded  ;  it  shall  be  treated  with  the  utmost 
tenderness  and  concern  for  its  interests."  In  our  age, 
on  the  other  hand,  altruism  is  fashionable.  To  judge  by 
men's  talk,  every  one's  life  to-day  is  a  perpetual  heroic 
self-denial.  And  withal  the  appeal  to  pleasure  holds 
its  ground.  This  goodness  is  worth  the  while !  we  give 
pleasure  to  our  neighbours  !  Butler  recalls  us  to  virtues 
which  utter  more  imperious  commands  to  the  conscience. 

Truth  may  seem  unkind ;  yet  in  all  essential  matters 
we  poor  human  creatures  owe  a  debt  of  truth  to  one 
another.  (In  non-essentials,  kind  silence  may  be  best.) 
1  Sermon  XI.,  near  beginning. 


CHRISTIAN    VIRTUES  133 

The  well-meant  lie  builds  up  a  sham  world,  whose  ruins 
may  bury  the  fool  that  planned  it  as  well  as  the  weakling 
for  whom  it  was  planned.  No  habit  can  be  socially  more 
harmful  in  the  long  run  than  untruthfulness.  And  yet 
for  the  moment,  probably,  we  cannot  feel  this  !  Religious 
principle  must  keep  us  truthful.  First,  we  are  bound — 
we  are  under  law.  Secondly,  we  trust  results  to  a  higher 
power.  The  only  concession  that  can  be  made  to  the 
favourers  of  unveracious  kindness  is  the  admission  that 
kindness  too  is  a  duty.  We  are  to  "  speak  the  truth — 
in  love."  The  person  who  can  administer  the  largest 
dose  of  truth  without  infringing  the  law  of  love  is, 
in  this  region,  the  best  Christian.  Sir  Walter  Scott's 
Jeanie  Deans — drawn  from  the  character  and  history  of 
the  real  Helen  Walker — could  not  lie,  even  to  rescue  a 
sister's  life  from  cruel  and  unjust  laws.  But  she  could 
and  did  walk  long  miles  to  London ;  she  could  and  did 
extort  a  pardon  for  her  sister.  Mere  veracity  might 
hardly  have  been  admirable ;  but  how  utterly  poor 
mere  unveracity  shows  in  comparison  with  that  triumph 
of  heroic  principle  !  Perhaps  we  find  ourselves  lacking 
in  cleverness  ?  We  cannot  be  both  kind  and  truthful ! 
What  if  that  was  the  very  discovery  we  needed  to 
make  ?  It  humbles  us  ;  but  "  with  the  lowly  is  wisdom." 
If  we  work  at  the  virtues  in  which  we  are  weakest,  we 
may  grow  wiser. 

Butler  also  emphasises  Justice;  it,  too,  I  venture  to 


i34  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

say,  is  a  religious  virtue.  There  is  a  constitution  of 
things  and  of  duties  fixed  for  us  by  God,  and  we  believe 
in  God's  love.  Let  the  right  be  done,  though  the  skies 
should  (seem  about  to)  fall !  This  must  be  our  mood  ; 
not  self-righteously,  but  humbly  ;  not  passionlessly,  as  in 
a  Marcus  Brutus,  but  passionately  as  in  Jesus  Christ — 
filled  with  the  passion  of  holy  love.  These  ideal  virtues 
become  wholesome  and  beneficent  when  we  not  merely 
do  the  right  for  the  abstract  right's  sake,  but  do  it  out  of 
love  to  men  and  out  of  loving  trust  in  God. 

Our  view  of  virtues,  together  constituting  a  Christian 
character,  may  be  repeated  as  follows  : — 

Personal  virtues :  Courage,  Self-control,  Prudence  or 
Wisdom. 

Social  virtue  :  Justice,  interpreted  as  Righteousness, 
fulfilled  by  Love. 

Religious  virtues :  Humility  (Repentance,  Faith), 
Patience,  Thankfulness,  Joy,  Fidelity  (Veracity,  Justice). 

The  reader  must  be  left  to  dwell  for  himself  upon  the 
half- virtues — Prudence,  Bespectability,  Courtesy,  Sense 
of  Honour  (possibly  others).  If  these  are  all  we  have 
by  way  of  virtues,  they  are  nothing  ;  but  the  handsomest 
virtues,  apart  from  such  solid  substructures,  will  prove 
to  be  equally  empty  and  equally  vain.  Half-virtues 
must  be  waived  when  virtue  itself  bids  us  do  so.  We 
dare  not  break  with  them  merely  to  indulge  ourselves. 


CHAPTER   XV 

CHRISTIAN   SOCIAL   INSTITUTIONS 

It  might  be  held  that,  in  our  present  imperfect  state, 
there  are  no  truly  Christian  institutions ;  or  again,  it 
might  be  held  there  is  but  one — the  Church.  But 
either  view  would  be  a  misunderstanding  of  Chris- 
tianity. What  is  imperfectly  Christian  is  not  therefore 
un-Christian.  Institutions  which  existed  before  histori- 
cal Christianity  appeared  may  be  taken  up  into  God's 
redeeming  purpose.  So  we  shall  speak  briefly  of  the 
Family  and  the  State,  as  well  as  of  the  Church.  And 
we  shall  further  include,  among  Christian  institutions, 
Political  Party  and  voluntary  Societies  for  doing  good. 
The  Family  had  passed  through  a  long  historical  evo- 
lution before  the  days  of  Christ's  earthly  life.  Under 
the  Old  Testament  polygamy  was  tolerated,  and  was 
consecrated  by  great  examples  (Abraham's  secondary 
wife ;  Jacob's  marriage  to  two  sisters  simultaneously — 
the  Mosaic  law,  however,  forbids  this ;  Levit.  xviii.   18 

---Elkanah,  I.   Sam.  i.  and  ii.).     Economic  conditions 

135 


136  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

always  restrict  polygamy;  only  the  rich  and  great  can 
practise  it  freely  (e.g.  David  and  all  Old  Testament  kings). 
By  the  Christian  era  it  had  nearly  disappeared  from 
Israel.  But  moral  advances  are  liable  to  be  forfeited. 
The  marriage  bond  in  Israel  was  threatened  by  lax 
divorces;  duty  to  a  parent  by  the  Oorban  (p.  48). 
Hence  Christ's  own  words  champion  the  family. 

(1)  He  protects  it  (p.  48) ;  the  "  word  of  God  "  is  not 
to  be  evaded  by  the  human  "tradition"  of  the  scribes. 
The  New  Testament  confirms  the  promise  of  happiness 
for  a  dutiful  child,  and  the  threat  of  sorrow  for  the 
undutiful  (Eph.  vi.  2).  (2)  Christ  purifies  the  family  by 
forbidding  divorce.  We  may  perhaps  conclude  that  His 
words  named  no  exception  whatever  to  the  permanence 
of  the  marriage  bond  (Mark  x.  11).  It  was  His 
habit  in  teaching  to  lay  down  broad  principles.  And 
yet  the  modified  version  of  His  saying  (Matt.  v.  32 ; 
perhaps  elsewhere — MSS.  vary)  may  be  no  incorrect 
interpretation.  When  we  develop  outward  laws,  loyal 
as  we  desire  to  be  to  moral  principles,  we  have  to 
take  account  of  actions  which  destroy  marriage.  If 
actual  tragic  unfaithfulness  has  occurred,  the  injured 
party  may  have  a  right  to  divorce  ;  and  conceivably 
other  wrongs  might  involve  the  same  liberty  (grave 
crime,  drunkenness).  No  doubt,  even  after  the  gravest 
wrong,  if  there  are  signs  of  real  repentance,  the  most 
Christian   course   for  the  injured  husband   or   injured 


SOCIAL    INSTITUTIONS  137 

wife  may  be  to  grant  forgiveness,  and  seek  to  reconse- 
crate the  outraged  home.  The  Church  may  recommend 
this  behaviour,  but  neither  Church  nor  State  can  enforce 
it.  Some  persons,  morally  too  weak  for  the  policy, 
might  make  bad  worse  by  trying  to  realise  it.  Where 
separation  without  right  of  re-marriage  is  feasible,  it  may 
be  the  nobler  choice ;  but  it  will  scarcely  fit  the  ugly  case 
now  under  consideration.  Law,  then,  may  and  probably 
ought  to  relieve  the  injured ;  but  any  law  which  meant 
in  practice  divorce  by  mutual  consent  would  destroy 
marriage. 

The  New  Testament  is  not  a  legal  code.  Earnest 
minds  may  honestly  differ  in  applying  great  principles 
to  painful  problems.  One  result  may  be  a  divergence 
between  Church  law  and  State  law.  Bigotry,  or  world- 
liness,  or  both,  may  treat  such  divergence  lightly  :  the 
instructed  Christian  will  do  his  utmost — little  though 
that  may  be — to  stave  off  such  tragic  trials  (p.  94). 
Churches — established  or  non-established — may  err  ; 
they  may  also  have  to  suffer  persecution  for  loyalty  to 
Christ's  teaching. 

(3)  Christ's  further  claim,  to  be  loved  better  than 
"  father  or  mother,"  is  the  final  consecration  of  family  life. 

"  I  could  not  love  thee,  dear,  so  well 
Loved  I  not  honour  more  ! " 

One  who  knows  this  quotation  as  used  by  F.  W. 
Robertson    will   not   be    surprised   to    meet   the    light 


138  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

cavalier  poet  in  the  sacred  region,  which  we  are  now 
treading.  Lovelace  spoke  deeper  truth  than  he  deemed. 
Like  obeying  "in  the  Lord"  (p.  88),  loving  "in  the 
Lord"  means,  first  and  chiefly,  loving  as  a  Christian 
should ;  but  it  also  means,  secondly,  loving  Christ  best 
of  all  and  putting  Christ's  claims  foremost.  No  other 
love  is  worth  the  having;  no  other  is  trustworthy. 
The  "Corban"  did  not  err  in  putting  God  first;  it 
erred  by  creating  an  imaginary  sanctity  for  the  collecting- 
box  and  by  ignoring  God's  known  will. 

(4)  Passing  beyond  Christ's  direct  teaching,  we  have 
an  important  principle  recognised  in  passing  by  St. 
Paul :  "  The  children  ought  not  to  lay  up  for  the  parents, 
but  the  parents  for  the  children  "  (II.  Cor.  xii.  14).  It 
is  characteristically  modern,  but  no  less  ethical  and 
Christian,  to  emphasise  parental  as  well  as  filial  duty. 

(5)  Foreign  writers  on  Christian  ethics  are  found  as- 
serting a  general — perhaps  universal — duty  of  marriage. 
This  seems  to  be  an  extreme  reaction  from  Roman 
Catholic  belittling  of  the  married  state  (pp.  80,  86). 
The  English-speaking  world  rather  inclines  to  hold 
that — health  and  reasonably  adequate  means  being  pre- 
supposed— the  romantic  attachment  of  true  love  alone 
justifies  marriage ;  but  also,  that  such  mutual  attach- 
ment makes  marriage  a  duty.  There  is  less  difference 
than  one  might  think  between  the  modern  marriage 
of  choice  and  the  antique  or  continental  marriage  of 


SOCIAL    INSTITUTIONS  139 

convenience.  Fickle  passion,  in  foolish  young  persons, 
or  in  more  foolish  older  ones,  sometimes  masquerades 
as  love.  And  under  the  other  system  true  love  in- 
sinuates itself  unexpectedly  into  the  better  minds. 
Romantic  passion  is  only  the  raw  material  of  wedded  love. 
Still — unworthy  as  we  too  often  are  of  our  franchises — 
it  would  be  a  relapse  in  Christian  civilisation  if  we 
abandoned  the  ideal  of  marriage  for  love  alone.  Love 
sanctifies  the  strange  union,  based  on  our  bodily  consti- 
tution, which  works  such  noble  or  such  terrible  effects 
in  making  or  marring  our  souls.  Love  turns  the  house 
into  a  home,  and  gives  the  child  its  welcome  and  its 
atmosphere. 

The  State  is  the  realm  of  organised  force  (p.  88),  working 
for  social  and — up  to  a  certain  point  (pp.  82,  161) — for 
moral  ends.  Hence  it  is  challenged  by  the  "  philosophi- 
cal anarchists."  These  amiable  pedants  resemble  the 
bomb-throwers  in  teaching  that,  if  the  State  were  out  of 
the  way,  men  would  be  perfectly  virtuous  an:1  perfectly 
happy.  They  differ  in  declining  to  use  force  against 
force.  They  are  more  logical,  and  will  have  no  homoeo- 
pathic cures.  We  must  grant  that  every  known  State 
has  faults  in  plenty ;  still,  we  hold  that  the  State  is 
divinely  willed,  and  not  only — as  theology  too  often 
has  taught — permitted  by  God  in  view  of  sin.  Christ 
came  in  a  land  where  the  head  of  the  State  had  long 
been    recognised    as    "  The    Lord's    Anointed."      He 


i4o  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

Himself  claimed  that  primarily  political  title.  As  the 
Christ,  He  was  King,  "  Messiah,"  Lord.  Jesus'  loyalty  to 
the  Old  Testament  puts  Tolstoy's  anarchistic  interpre- 
tation of  Gospel  teaching  out  of  court.  Christ  was  no  law- 
giver. He  did  not  wish  to  expound  a  code  of  casuistry 
like  that  of  the  scribes,  whose  method  He  borrows — 
and  travesties — in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (p.  50). 
In  saying  "  Resist  not  evil,"  He  is  stating  the  extreme 
demand  for  inward  moral  goodness.  To  bridle  revenge 
— "  not  more  than  an  eye  for  an  eye  "  (p.  55) — is  too 
little.  The  prose  of  our  Lord's  requirement  is  found  in 
St.  Paul :  "  Why  not  rather  take  wrong  "  (I.  Cor.  vi.  7). 
How  can  we  do  the  greatest  moral  good  in  the  situation 
appointed  for  us  ? — that  is  the  question  we  are  to  ask. 

During  our  Lord's  earthly  life  the  supreme  State 
power  belonged  to  the  Roman  Empire.  Christ  sanctions 
the  empire  when  He  bids  men  pay  tribute  (Matt.  xxii.  21). 
The  fanatical  yet  plausible  fear  that  such  tribute  was 
disloyalty  to  the  God  of  Israel  does  not  exist  for  Christ. 
St.  Paul  glosses  the  Master's  teaching  in  Rom.  xiii.,  ex- 
panding Christ's  hints  widely,  yet  quite  fairly.  "The 
powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God.  Render  therefore  to 
all  their  due — tribute  to  whom  tribute."  In  other  words  : 
State  force  is  a  Divine  institution,  working  upon  the 
whole  for  moral  ends.  This  teaching  is  the  charter  of 
Christianity  as  a  power  making  for  peace  and  order — 
a  power  in  the  deepest  sense  friendly  to  the  State. 


SOCIAL    INSTITUTIONS  141 

Those  who  realise  how  thin  is  the  veneer  of  civilisa- 
tion, and  how  near  to  the  surface  the  anarchical  instincts 
lie,  will  deplore  any  policy  that  encourages  men  to  make 
little  of  the  State's  claim  to  our  reverence  as  a  God- 
given  authority. 

If  the  State  is  (p.  139)  in  a  limited  degree  a  moral 
institution,  we  may  say  something  here  of  the  limitations, 
leaving  until  later  (p.  166)  the  justification  of  the  asser- 
tion that  the  State  is  really  in  essence  moral.  No  State 
can  legislate  against  vice  beyond  what  the  sympathies 
of  its  people  will  support ;  else  it  will  do  more  harm 
than  good.  And  yet  the  frontiers  of  State  action  may 
advance.  Nameless  vices  that  the  ancient  world  smiled 
at  are  now  crimes  incurring  penal  servitude.  Such 
growing  strictness  may  be  expected  in  the  future  too. 
Criminal  law  makes  no  saints,  but  it  is  an  outwork  of 
morality ;  it  may  awaken,  and  in  some  small  measure  may 
train,  the  conscience.  Perhaps  few  men  are  so  perfectly 
virtuous  as  not  to  be  better  for  the  cold  shock  one 
receives  on  realising  that  some  doubtful  course  which 
one  had  been  half-contemplating  might  bring  one  into 
the  grasp  of  the  police. 

The  Christian  can  be  a  loyal  citizen  in  any  State, 
unless  one  that  was  resolutely  persecuting  or  resolutely 
vicious.  As  democracy  grows  stronger,  the  State  bestows 
greater  privileges  on  its  citizens,  and  allows  them  more 
opportunity  for  service  and   influence.     But   the  need 


142  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

of  loyal  submissiveness  remains.  A  hostile  majority, 
making  a  not  wholly  unreasonable  use  of  its  power, 
represents  for  the  time  being  the  majesty  of  the 
whole  State.  And  the  hereditary  king  or  elective 
chief  magistrate  is,  by  God's  will  in  Providence,  the 
embodiment  of  the  whole  nation's  dignity. 

The  society  which  has  no  restrictions  on  its  capacities 
for  moral  service  is  not  the  State  but  the  Church. 
There  were  religious  communities,  both  national  and 
voluntary,  before  the  Christian  era ;  yet  the  Church,  even 
as  an  institution,  is  the  new  creation  of  Jesus  Christ  j  it 
is  in  ideal  an  international  society,  corresponding  to 
our  world-wide  heavenly  citizenship.  Two  actions  of 
our  Lord's  founded  the  Church ;  first,  the  selection  of 
the  Twelve  (the  germ  of  a  new  Israel);  secondly,  His 
observance  of  the  Last  Supper  with  His  disciples.  Out 
of  these  scanty  germs  everything  else  grew — at  first,  and 
within  the  New  Testament,  under  the  belief  in  Christ's 
immediate  visible  return  ;  later,  with  a  bolder  growth  of 
institutions,  on  the  lines  of  Catholic  sacramentalism  and 
hierarchy  (cf.  pp.  63,  66). 

Yet  moral  service  cannot  be  regarded  as  the  Church's 
only  function;  it  is  hardly  even  the  chief  function. 
The  Church  exists  (1)  for  the  worship  of  God  in  Christ 
through  the  Holy  Spirit ;  (2)  for  mutual  edification  by 
the  Word  of  God  ;  (3)  for  the  evangelisation  of  the  world  ; 
(4)  for  all  moral  services  compatible  with  these  primary 


SOCIAL    INSTITUTIONS  143 

purposes.  The  Church  may  properly  be  utilised  for 
many  social  helps,  e.g.  we  may  have  Church  football 
clubs.  Yet  surely,  in  the  ideal  Christianised  society, 
every  football  club  in  the  land  will  have  Christian  men 
taking  the  lead  in  it  and  setting  the  tone.  However 
essential  to-day  the  multitude  of  our  Churches'  social 
institutions,  they  testify  to  a  defective,  rather  than  to 
an  advanced  Christianity.  The  inward  moral  moulding 
of  its  members  is  the  Church's  deepest  moral  service 
(p.  91),  and  one  that  will  always  last.  (For  Church 
discipline,  cf.  p.  92.) 

The  growth  of  the  modern  State  has  resulted  in  one 
very  singular  formation — political  party.  Party  govern- 
ment may  look  like  the  reductio  ad  absurdum  of  the 
competitive  system.  Two  sets  of  persons  are  to  be  in 
readiness  to  undertake  administration  and  the  guidance 
of  legislation,  and  each  set  is  to  spend  much  of  its 
strength  in  discrediting  the  other !  Looking  more 
closely,  we  see  the  situation  differently.  Freedom 
means  government  by  discussion ;  government  by  dis- 
cussion means  government  by  criticism.  Practical 
necessity  does  not  allow  more  options  than  two.  If 
many  groups  take  the  place  of  two  well-marked  par- 
ties, administration  becomes  unstable  and  the  machine 
locks.  (If  the  factions  that  turned  out  one  administra- 
tion hold  together  in  support  of  its  successor,  you  have 
the  two-party  system  reinstated !)     There  is  no  escape 


i44  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

if  freedom  is  to  continue.  Through  the  (doubtless  im- 
perfect) process  of  debate,  the  wishes  of  individual  sup- 
porters are  beaten  out  into  something  like  a  coherent 
policy,  capable  of  being  defended  in  argument.  The 
duty  of  a  Christian  is  (1)  to  play  his  part  in  politics,  not 
shirking;  hence  he  must  choose  his  party.  (2)  He 
must  not  place  party  loyalty  above  patriotism,  still  less 
must  he  sacrifice  to  it  the  highest  loyalty  of  all.  He  will 
recognise  that  good  men  are  to  be  found  on  both  sides. 
Yet  one  party  may  have  been  distinctly  the  more 
Christian.  (3)  Still,  there  is  no  entail  of  party  virtue. 
The  situation  may  change.  Those  formerly  more  Chris- 
tian may  be  the  less  Christian  now.  One  must  not 
lightly  leave  one's  party ;  but  the  man  who  has  a  higher 
loyalty  will  make  the  change  bravely  when  conscience 
bids  him. 

It  is  for  the  welfare  of  the  country  that  many  Chris- 
tian voters  should  be  known  to  exist,  who,  recognising  the 
necessity  of  party  and  therefore  of  compromise,  recognise 
that  there  are  also  higher  claims,  and  that  on  some  points 
compromise  is  sin. 

Societies  voluntarily  organised  for  doing  good  have 
their  prototypes  far  back  in  history.  In  our  own 
age  or  our  fathers',  under  Christian  influence,  they 
have  had  a  wide  extension ;  and,  we  trust,  they  wield  a 
purer  power.  It  is  perhaps  strange  that  hospitals  and 
lifeboats    should    still    in   our  land   be    foundlings   of 


SOCIAL    INSTITUTIONS         145 

charity.  But,  however  many  things  states  or  muni- 
cipalities or  Churches  (p.  143)  may  organise,  active 
good-will  must  continue  to  dig  channels  of  its  own 
in  voluntary  association  with  others  as  well  as  by  in- 
dividual effort.  Support  of  such  works  in  cash  is  so 
far  good :  personal  service  is  better.  The  latter  is  the 
true  "  Christian  charity."  (See  Ecce  Homo,  near  end 
of  chap,  xviii.,  and  cf.  p.  116.) 


CHAPTER  XVI 

SOME   OPEN   QUESTIONS 

We  now  turn  from  the  more  certain  parts  of  Chris- 
tian ethics  to  its  problems.  There  are  not  only  open 
questions,  properly  so-called,  where  opinions  inevitably 
differ  as  to  what  is  the  right  policy ;  there  are  also 
unsolved  questions — things  admittedly  desirable  which 
the  Christian  Church  has  not  yet  been  able  to  achieve. 
Before  dealing  in  our  closing  chapter  with  the  social 
problem,  we  are  to  speak  here  of  some  lesser  points — 
lesser,  and  yet  weighty.  The  reader  will  notice  how  the 
very  achievements  of  Christianity  in  the  past  recur  in 
the  shape  of  problems,  imperiously  demanding  further 
advance  in  the  future. 

The  Higher  Christian  Life.  It  is  somewhat  remark- 
able how  little  our  innovating  age  has  to  say  about  new 
aspects  of  personal  Christian  duty.  Rightly  or  wrongly, 
all  proposals  for  advance  seem  to  lie  in  the  region  of 
social  service.     There  is  a  single  exception,  in  what  we 

know  as  the  Keswick  Movement.     In  so  far  as  it  seeks 

146 


SOME    OPEN    QUESTIONS        147 

to  deepen  personal  Christianity,  the  movement  is  most 
truly  Christian  in  aim ;  in  so  far  as  it  relies  upon  wor- 
ship and  Christian  fellowship,  its  methods  are  no  less 
genuinely  Christian.  These  are  things  which  God  must 
bless.  The  peculiar  teachings  of  the  movement  can- 
not be  praised  so  confidently.  There  is  to  be  a  great 
extension  of  the  conception  of  faith.  We  are  not  only 
to  be  justified  but  sanctified — in  the  theological  sense ; 
"  made  righteous " — instantaneously,  by  simple  belief 
of  God's  word.  Effort  is  not  half  the  truth  (p.  10) ;  it 
is  a  moral  lapse.     Sorrow  and  suffering  are  unbelief. 

A  writer  upon  Christian  ethics  is  not  entitled  to  pass 
by  this  teaching  in  silence.  It  seems  to  be  distinctly 
false.  We  should  have  to  rewrite  the  New  Testament, 
if  we  were  to  make  it  square  with  the  Keswick  ideal. 
There  is  grave  danger  from  make-believe  in  the  re- 
ligious life ;  there  may  be  moral  collapse  when  imagi- 
nary supports  are  withdrawn.  And  one  thing  more.  It 
is  assumed  that  this  "  second  blessing,"  while  greatly  to 
be  desired,  is  something  beyond  the  faith  which  saves. 
Here  we  have,  transposed  into  another  key,  Roman 
Catholic  "counsels  of  perfection"  (p.  68)  over  again. 
Protestant  ethics  must  lodge  a  protest.  God's  gift  is  also 
God's  requirement ;  what  He  demands  of  any,  the  same 
thing  in  principle,  or  its  equivalent,  He  demands  of  all. 
We  may  well  be  ashamed  of  the  average  Christian  life ; 
but  no  scheme  of  supererogatory  goodness  will  mend  it. 


148  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

If  the  ethical  revival,  of  which  some  have  dreamed, 
should  come  to  us  from  God,  must  it  not  come  primarily 
as  a  sterner  view  of  the  requirements  of  cross-bearing — 
that  universal  demand  ? 

The  reunion  of  Christendom  is  rather  a  misnomer. 
There  never  was  a  complete  formal  incorporation  of  all 
believers  in  one  organisation ;  there  never  has  been, 
at  the  root,  separation  between  any  two  souls  both 
of  whom  were  truly  "in  Christ  Jesus."  Still,  our 
divisions  are  deplorable,  and  sometimes  monstrous. 
They  come  to  us  by  a  historic  process.  Often  we, 
Christians  of  the  present,  would  not  in  the  like  circum- 
stances make  the  separation  which  our  fathers  made. 
But  sometimes,  as  e.g.  in  the  case  of  the  Protestant 
Reformation,  we  are  loyal  to  their  policy  in  every 
fibre  of  our  being ;  and  in  all  cases  we  inherit  what 
God's  providence  has  allotted  to  us.  If  evil  is  mixed 
with  it,  good  greatly  predominates.  We  must  be  wise 
guardians  of  this  good  inheritance. 

Our  duty  is  (1)  to  endeavour  to  keep  the  unity  of 
the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace  (Eph.  iv.  3).  Where 
there  is  brotherly  sympathy  between  Christians  of  dif- 
ferent denominations,  there  is  essential  unity.  Where 
there  is  jealousy  (e.g.  between  two  neighbouring  congre- 
gations incorporated  in  the  same  Church  fellowship), 
there  is  essential  schism.  (2)  Such  organised  co-opera- 
tion as  that  of  the  Endish  Free  Church  Councils  carries 


SOME    OPEN    QUESTIONS        149 

us  a  long  way  forward.  Still,  there  may  be  guilty  and 
wilful  overlapping  even  to  this  hour.  (3)  Fresh  "over- 
lapping," at  home  and  yet  more  in  the  mission  field, 
should  be  branded  as  a  crime  against  Christ.  (4)  Mere 
comprehension  in  one  organisation  of  persons  who  be- 
lieve each  other  to  be  fatally  in  the  wrong  is  bad,  not 
good.  (5)  In  other  words,  central  truth  and  faith 
limit  the  possibilities  of  a  truly  Christian  visible  union. 
Evangelical  Protestants  admit  to-day  for  the  most  part 
that  questions  of  Church  order  ought  not  to  separate. 
Church  order  is  not  of  immediate  Bible  authority ;  if  it 
were,  still,  the  Bible  is  not  a  law-book.  That  system 
which  has  most  promise  of  doing  good  is  the  most 
Christian  of  Church  orders.  On  the  other  hand, 
fellowship  with  those  who  claim  exclusive  power  to 
save  for,  e.g.,  episcopacy,  is  for  us  disloyalty  to  Christ. 
He  saves — He  alone ;  He  fully.  (6)  Apart  from  theo- 
logical divisions,  the  glamour  of  union  in  a  national 
Church  has  done  most  to  pulverise  Christendom.  This 
is  specially  true  of  Scotland. 

Home  Missions  are  needful  because  of  the  changes  due 
to  the  industrial  revolution  (p.  159),  and  because  opinion 
would  not  tolerate  any  great  extension  of  an  endowed 
State  system.  The  latter  system  broke  down.  Its  friends 
may  say  it  had  no  chance  given  it  under  exacting  modern 
conditions ;  at  any  rate,  established  Churches  themselves 
have  had  to  rely  of  late  chiefly  upon   voluntary  gifts. 


CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 


Wasteful  overlapping  has  made  the  task  of  all  the 
Churches  needlessly  hard.  On  the  Continent  the  new- 
conditions  have  hardly  even  been  faced.  There  the 
working  classes  have  lost  almost  all  touch  with  organised 
Christianity.  In  our  own  land  the  estrangement  is 
less,  yet  very  grave. 

It  is  sometimes  said  that  Home  and  Foreign  Missions 
"are  one."  This  is  true  in  the  sense  that  both  are  a 
service  to  Christ  and  to  mankind,  but  the  letter  of  the 
expression  is  hardly  true.  Foreign  Missions  call  upon 
men  of  strange  races  to  cast  away  their  inherited 
spiritual  ties  and  substitute  a  better  one.  True,  the 
sacrifice  is  worth  making.  To  ask  for  it  is  to  offer  any 
soul  God's  best  gift.  True,  the  Christian  convert  is 
disloyal  only  in  seeming.  Inwardly,  he  is  more  loyal 
than  ever  to  what  was  good  in  his  past.  But  Home 
Missions  recall  men  to  their  own  faith,  to  their  fathers' 
God.  The  civilisation  round  them,  however  imperfect, 
is  deeply  suffused  with  Christianity. 

Foreign  Missions  had  had  great  epochs,  both  primitive 
and  mediaeval ;  but  in  Protestantism  they  long  hung 
fire.  In  God's  providence,  just  before  the  steam-engine 
contracted  the  world,  the  Christian  Church,  led  especially 
by  William  Carey,  embarked  on  a  world-wide  missionary 
campaign.  If  neither  reverence  for  Christ's  will  nor 
pity  for  our  fellows  made  us  willing  to  evangelise  distant 
races,  we  should  have  to  do  it  now  lest  they  taint  us ; 


SOME    OPEN    QUESTIONS        151 

we  are  all  next-door  neighbours  to-day.  Well,  indeed, 
that  the  nobler  motives  had  started  the  work  before  the 
selfish  motive  became  loud  and  imperious !  Much 
ground  has  already  been  gained.  But  we  are  not  the 
only  workers.  Mohammedanism,  Hinduism,  Agnos- 
ticism are  vigorous  and  aggressive ;  each  of  them  has 
gains  to  boast  of,  too.  Meantime,  our  very  success  is 
embarrassing  us.  Can  we  go  forward  where  prospects 
are  brightening?  It  will  be  our  eternal  disgrace  if  we 
fail  to  do  so.  Denominational  rivalries,  we  may  trust, 
are  ceasing  to  make  much  mischief  in  Foreign  Missions. 
Tendencies  to  unity  there  will  no  doubt  help  Christianity 
in  its  older  homes.  And  we  await  contributions  to 
Christian  theology,  as  well  as  to  Christian  life,  from 
the  new  races  who  shall  press  into  God's  kingdom  and 
declare  in  their  own  tongues  His  marvellous  works. 
Among  many  good  missionary  methods,  ever-increasing 
use  of  native  agents  seems  to  be  the  most  hopeful 
of  all. 

The  Drink  Problem.  As  Foreign  Missions  began 
their  great  modern  development  just  before  the  world 
shrank  together,  so  the  method  of  total  abstinence 
came  into  vogue  just  before  science  began  to  expose  the 
pretensions  of  alcohol.  We  know  now  that  alcohol  is 
not  a  standard  food,  still  less  a  cure-all,  as  age-long 
superstitions  taught.  It  yields  no  nourishment,  and  is 
an  uncertain  as  well  as  dangerous  drug.     The  teetotal 


iS2  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

movement  is  not  ascetic,  either  in  intention  or  in  ten- 
dency. It  is  through  and  through  altruistic.  Hardly 
one  person  in  ten  thousand  will  consent  to  abstain  from 
alcohol  for  his  own  safety  (though  abstainers  may  well 
thank  God  for  having  led  them  by  other  motives  to 
this  personal  precaution  and  safeguard).  Very  many 
will  consent  when  they  see  Abstinence  in  its  true  light 
as  brotherly  succour  in  face  of  an  awful  danger.  When 
we  add  to  this  the  medical  view,  what  policy  can  we 
deem  wise  except  the  abstainer's?  Yet  we  must  pre- 
pare ourselves  for  fellowship  with  brethren  who  judge 
differently.  Some  object  to  the  pledge.  And  it  must 
be  admitted  that  a  pledge  often  broken,  often  renewed, 
often  broken  again,  is  no  small  scandal.  Yet  we  must 
urge  on  our  critical  friends  that  a  pledge  is  unescapable. 
What  chance  is  there  for  the  victim  of  drink  except  in  a 
determination — i.e.  a  pledge  or  vow — to  abstain  ?  But 
friendly  critics  and  we  may  do  much  good  in  alliance. 
We  may  work  together  to  lessen  temptations  by  reforming 
the  arrangements  of  law. 

The  final  remedy  for  the  drink  evil  must  indeed  be  a 
Christian  enthusiasm  (Eph.  v.  18 ;  often  quoted  in  this 
sense).  On  a  lower  plane,  it  is  true  that  men  need 
pleasure,  and  that  philanthropy  must  seek  to  organise 
pure  pleasures  as  well  as  to  cut  off  impure  supplies. 
Else  we  shall  be  guilty  of  applying  purely  mechanical 
treatment  to  an  organic  craving. 


SOME    OPEN    QUESTIONS        153 

Gambling  is  another  form  of  the  mad  love  for  excite- 
ment. In  view  of  the  inevitable  social  effects  of  this 
vice,  there  seems  no  reasonable  plea  for  any  other 
method  than  refusal  to  bet  or  to  play  games  for  even 
the  minutest  stakes.  Remedies  for  the  public  organi- 
sation of  gambling,  by  heartless  social  parasites,  cannot 
here  be  discussed. 

Population.  Two  opposite  dangers  have  been  feared 
in  regard  to  this.  The  early  Political  Economists 
taught  that  fewer  births  in  working-class  homes  would 
secure  prosperity  there  as  nothing  else  could  do.  But 
more  recently  the  contrary  danger  has  been  feared. 
In  all  civilised  lands  the  birth-rate  is  rapidly  falling. 
France  is  first  in  this  race,  but  only  first — not  isolated. 
French  publicists  lament  the  loss  of  military  power; 
but  that  is  the  least  of  the  dangers  connected  with  a 
wilful  self-indulgence  which  shuns  the  pains  and  costs 
of  child-bearing  and  child-rearing. 

Although  these  two  alarms  look  in  opposite  direc- 
tions, it  does  not  follow  that  either  fear  is  groundless. 
Marriages  prudently  entered  into,  births  which  have 
the  promise  of  health,  will  strike  the  mean  between  too 
few  and  too  many,  and  in  still  more  vital  ways  will 
have  the  promise  of  God's  blessing.  Civilisation  might 
indeed  perish  by  recklessness.  It  is  perhaps  even 
more  likely  to  perish  by  a  purely  selfish  prudence. 

Race.     The  nineteenth  century  revived  the  sense  of 


i54  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

nationality,  but  lost  something  of  the  eighteenth 
century's  cosmopolitan  humanitarianism.  Italy,  Ger- 
many, Hungary,  the  Transvaal,  Ireland — all  the  world 
over,  racial  and  nationalist  claims  have  grown  loud. 
There  is  a  seamy  side  to  this  change  in  racial  frictions 
and  jealousies.  Where  a  colour  line  exists,  as  in  the 
American  negro  problem,  the  so-called  "  Yellow  Peril," 
the  Indian  difficulty  in  South  Africa,  &c,  tension 
becomes  extreme.  Our  generation  still  talks  humani- 
tarianism, but  it  lives  mainly  for  race  and  class  (p.  163) 
jealousies.  It  does  not  seem  possible  to  affirm  that 
Christianity  demands  immediate  mingling  of  races  and 
universal  inter-marriage.  But  Christianity  does  demand 
absolute  mutual  respect  and  essential  equality.  Within 
that  widest  human  claim  we  are  to  do  Christian  service 
chiefly  by  loyalty  to  our  own  race,  preserving  what  it 
has  gained  and  pushing  onward  to  further  moral 
developments.  Ultimately,  when  by  God's  goodness 
each  race  has  advanced  to  higher  things,  it  seems  certain 
that  the  dividing  barriers  must  fall.  "  There  is  neither 
Greek  nor  Jew  .  .  .  Barbarian,  Scythian,  bond  nor  free  : 
but  Christ  is  all,  and  in  all"  (Col.  hi.  11). 

Vegetarianism  can  hardly  claim  directly  Christian 
motives.  In  the  early  centuries  the  Church  had  to  be 
on  its  guard  against  religious  asceticism  (Col.  ii.  21) 
due  to  the  belief  that  matter  was  at  least  in  part  the 
work  of  an  evil  power.     The  Christian  Church  rightly 


SOME    OPEN    QUESTIONS        155 

condemned  this  heresy  (Mark  vii.  19,  R.V. ;  Acts  x.  15). 
Enforced  vegetarianism  would  always  be  an  un-Christian 
thing.  Yet  surely  civilisation  would  be  sweeter  and 
more  Christlike  if  it  could  eliminate  the  shambles.  The 
aim  stands  neither  first  nor  second  among  practicable 
reforms ;  but  it  is  well  to  contemplate  remoter  workings 
of  the  Christian  spirit.  In  the  past  the  advantages 
of  flesh  food  have  been  exaggerated.  Moderation  in 
its  use  is  a  great  gain. 

War  arises  naturally  out  of  the  constitution  of  the 
State  as  resting  upon  force  (p.  139),  so  long  at  least  as 
there  is  no  tribunal  to  arbitrate  between  independent 
nations.  Internal  government  is  ruled,  almost  perfectly, 
by  the  forces  of  law  and  order ;  riots,  though  dis- 
creditable, occupy  little  space  in  history ;  civil  war,  the 
worst  war  of  all,  is  happily  rare.  But  external  relations 
have  no  ordered  force  to  control  them — only  the  dread- 
ful arbitrament  of  battle.  This  is  the  point  to  which 
Christian  civilisation  has  advanced  ;  and  here  it  pauses. 
The  nation-state  (mainly  a  modern  creation)  makes  for 
good  order  and  general  happiness ;  but  between  nations 
there  occur  not  infrequently  outbursts  of  anarchy,  hardly 
tempered  by  the  customs  of  war. 

Christian  duties  are  (1)  to  oppose  wars  of  aggression. 
Of  course,  it  is  often  hard  to  say  which  side  is  aggressive 
and  which  defensive.  The  real  maker  of  mischief  may 
wear  sheep's  clothing  (Bismarck's  telegram  from  Ems 


156  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

in  1870).  But  something  is  gained  when  the  principle 
is  accepted.  Whatever  wars  we  enter  on,  there  must  be 
no  aggression  on  our  part.  (2)  Ought  wars  of  Christian 
knight-errantry  to  be  undertaken,  on  behalf  of  weak 
and  oppressed  races  ?  Probably  there  are  cases  in  which 
an  armed  Christian  nation  stands  disgraced  if  it  leaves 
injured  allies  or  fellow-Christians,  or  even  fellow-men,  to 
suffer  unchampioned.  But  the  dangers  are  tremendous. 
To  carry  a  naked  light  into  a  powder  magazine  would 
be  safer  than  to  initiate  a  war  in  modern  Europe.  At 
the  best  there  would  be  mixed  motives  in  the  knight- 
errant  nation ;  and  what  evil  passions  even  such  a  war 
as  that  must  unlock  in  all  the  lands  !  (3)  We  must 
cultivate  the  spirit  that  makes  for  peace.  This  need 
not  involve  steady  blame  of  our  own  country,  with 
unmingled  praise  of  our  rivals.  It  demands  a  still 
nearer  approach  to  impartial  justice.  Else,  even  in 
advocating  peace,  we  may  arouse  the  war  spirit ;  for  its 
origin  is  in  angry  desires  (Jas.  iv.  1).  To  plead  God's 
cause  in  a  sneering  temper  is  not  to  be  a  peacemaker. 
(4)  If  a  martyr  nation  arose  which  with  practical 
unanimity  refused  to  assert  or  maintain  its  rights  by 
bloodshed,  no  one  can  say  what  moral  energies  might 
be  developed  (cf.  Tolstoy's  Ivan  the  Fool).  The  monk 
Telemachus,  who  leapt  into  the  gladiatorial  arena,  about 
404  a.d.,  paid  the  penalty  of  his  daring  with  his  life ;  but 
there  were  no  more  gladiatorial  shows  in  "Christian" 


SOME   OPEN    QUESTIONS        157 

Rome.  Enviable  man,  to  win  such  an  advance  by  one 
final  sacrifice !  (But  how  could  he  tell  he  would  win 
the  day  ?  He  died  faithfully :  he  could  do  no  more. 
Who  need  do  less  ?) 

The  Woman  Question.  Women  have  conspicuously 
been  debtors  to  Christ  and  Christianity ;  there  is  much 
still  to  be  done  for  them.  In  the  recent  Frauenfrage  of 
many  lands,  we  read  a  desire  for  the  complete  economic 
independence  of  women  and  their  complete  social  equiva- 
lence with  men.  The  older  view  held  that  men,  upon 
whose  physical  strength  the  State  ultimately  reposes 
(p.  139),  are  specially  responsible  to  God,  as  for  other 
things,  so  also  for  the  protection  of  woman's  weakness. 

If  the  new  views  conquer,  one  result  must  be  that 
the  Christian  ministry  shall  be  shared  by  both  sexes. 
Possible,  but  a  great  revolution. 

Christian  ethics  affirm  the  following  certainties.  (1) 
In  Christ  Jesus  there  is  absolute  essential  equality 
between  the  sexes.  (2)  The  sexes  are  differentiated  by 
nature.  (3)  Marriage  must  continue  to  be  the  honour- 
able lot  of  most  women.  (4)  In  our  complex  civilisation 
many  women  must  be  bread-winners ;  the  position  is 
often  anomalous  (hardly  so  in  the  case  of  teachers, 
or  nurses),  but  it  cannot  be  wished  away.  (5)  More 
public  service  can  and  ought  to  be  rendered  by  women 
than  in  the  past.  (6)  Idleness  or  dilettantism  cannot 
suffice  for  the  adult  single  woman — unengrossed  in  the 


158  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

duties  of  marriage — any  more  than  for  the  adult  man. 
Each  life  has  the  duty  and  privilege  of  definitely  serving 
Christ  and  the  community.  Leisure  is  for  the  interstices 
of  work.  A  whole  life's  framework  carved  out  of  leisure 
is  a  hollow  thing. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

CHRISTIANITY  AND  THE  SOCIAL  PROBLEM 

Here  again  (p.  146)  the  very  achievements  of  the 
past  transform  themselves  into  an  imperious  problem 

for  the  future.  It  is  not  when  things  are  worst  that  evil 
is  most  keenly  resented  :  despair  is  then  too  near.  Let 
things  begin  to  mend,  and  hope  will  become  even  too 
impatient.  So  in  part  it  has  been  with  our  Christian 
civilisation.  Slavery  has  been  killed,  but  men  complain 
to-day  of  "  wage  slavery." 

Yet  this  is  not  the  whole  truth.  The  modern  social 
problem  is  not  due  merely  to  a  quickened  sense  of  evils 
that  always  were  present.  Our  grandfathers  brewed  it 
for  us  in  the  days  of  what  we  call  the  industrial  revolu- 
tion. The  thing  is  well  so  named.  It  was  a  revolution 
indeed.  Few  like  it  can  be  found  in  all  history.  From 
the  patriarchs'  camel-trains  to  stage-coaches  meant  less 
change  than  from  coaches  to  modern  machinery.  And 
society  has  been  no  less  revolutionised.  It  cleaned  its 
slate.  Custom  broke  down.  Now  custom  is  far  from 
159 


160  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

perfect ;  it  does  not  originate  in  philanthropy,  and  it  may 
easily  paralyse  progress ;  yet  of  necessity,  up  to  a  certain 
point,  it  protects  the  weak.  It  represents  a  tacit  under- 
standing as  to  what  may  and  what  cannot  be  exacted. 
When  the  steam-engine  began  its  career,  civilised  society 
(in  England  first  of  all)  sprang  forward  in  wealth,  in 
population,  in  technical  efficiency  ;  but  the  old  customs, 
which  had  embodied  much  of  the  moral  capital  of 
society,  proved  inapplicable.  The  strain  was  too  great. 
They  disappeared  *  and  for  a  time  nothing  took  their  place 
except  the  theory  of  laissez-faire  individualism,  which 
affirmed  individual  effort  to  be  not  merely  one  whole- 
some social  agency,  but  the  only  agency  which  acts  safely. 
Laissez-faire  theory  is  useful  in  pointing  out  the 
causes  of  individual  failure.  Among  the  masses  of  men 
competing  against  each  other,  some  are  intellectually 
inferior,  some  mentally,  some  morally;  by  their  weak- 
ness or  their  fault  these  fall  behind,  and  their  children 
too  often  inherit  the  fathers'  bad  conditions.  An  age 
of  extreme  individualism  drives  strong  men  to  their 
utmost,  and  mercilessly  exacts  penalty  from  the  weak. 
When  the  pace  is  quickened  by  a  wild  rush  for  wealth, 
the  social  problem  emerges.  What  is  to  be  its  cure? 
Individualism  (properly  so-called)  sees  nothing  except 
blessings  and  benefits  in  competition.  Men  do  their  best, 
for  themselves  and  for  society,  in  view  of  the  rewards 
which  success   brings  and  the  penalties  failure  incurs. 


THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM  161 

Every  effort  to  staunch  the  bleeding  sores  of  society 
is  held  by  the  laissez-faire  theory  to  do  more  harm 
indirectly  than  it  can  compass  of  good  by  conscious 
effort.  Most  of  the  school  allow  individual  generosity  *  to 
do  what  it  pleases;  but  civic  or  national  philanthropy, 
it  is  held,  will  lessen  the  struggle  for  success  and  will 
sacrifice  efficiency.  This  view  may  be  held  honestly  by 
generous  hearts  ;  but  it  is  in  itself  almost  a  message  of 
despair.  Pushed  to  the  furthest,  it  may  have  to  condemn 
even  private  pity.  Does  not  pitifulness  always  interfere 
between  acts  and  consequences  ?  Does  it  not  lessen  the 
penalties  of  inefficiency  ? 

We  may  grant  to  the  individualists  that  the  "  letting 
alone"  policy  would  result  in  equilibrium  of  a  kind. 
Famine,  if  Government  does  not  "  interfere,"  will  reduce 
over-population ;  and  a  single  spasm  of  acute  suffering 
may  conceivably  be  better  than  long-continued  semi- 
starvation.  An  epidemic  too  will  weed  out  weaklings. 
But  it  is  far  from  evident  that  "  natural "  equilibrium 
will  be  the  best  possible.  It  may  not  even  be  tolerable. 
That  we  are  one  another's  rivals  is  part  of  the  truth, 
but  not  the  whole.  The  other  half  of  the  truth  teaches 
that  we  are  members  one  of  another.  Infection  may 
seize  on  the  fittest;  epidemics  may  slay  or  maim  the 
healthy.  It  is  our  duty  and  our  personal  need  to  seek 
for  a  humanly  and  Christianly  tolerable  equilibrium. 

1  Chalmers  on  Charity,  by  Mr.  Masterman  of  the  C.O.S.,  puts 
at  its  very  best  the  case  for  freewill  versus  state  charity. 

L 


i62  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

More  particularly  the  individualist  theory  errs  in 
treating  man  as  an  abstract  competitive  unit  apart  from 
consideration  of  his  inherited  civilisation.  Even  when 
custom  broke  down  under  the  strain  of  unexampled 
industrial  progress,  this  did  not  mean  that  all  custom 
ceased.  Unemployed  labourers,  even  in  the  grip  of 
competition,  do  not  turn  vegetarians,  and  contract  for 
work  at  a  few  pence  a  day.  They  demand — rightly — 
work  and  wage  in  some  proportion  to  their  inherited 
social  standard.  When,  under  slow  pressure,  the  stan- 
dard of  comfort  in  any  class  sinks,  civilisation  itself 
suffers  a  relapse.  Again,  individual  efficiency  might 
guarantee  complete  social  salvation,  if  you  could  begin 
with  well-equipped  individuals.  What  sort  of  material 
has  the  haphazard  industrial  process  given  us  hitherto  ? 
It  overworked  women;  it  worked  little  children;  it 
has  not  entirely  ceased  to  do  so.  How  ruinous  are 
the  physiological  and  moral  results  ! 

At  the  present  hour  we  hear  less  of  the  abstract 
individualism  which  embodied  the  wishes  of  masters  in 
a  former  generation.  We  hear  much  more  of  the 
one-sided  Socialism  which  is  demanded  by  labour  to- 
day. Modern  Socialism  is  economic,  in  contrast  to  the 
communism  of  Plato's  Republic  and  of  other  literary 
Utopias.  Still  there  is  a  moral  strain  in  it.  Admittedly 
or  unadmittedly,  Socialist  attacks  on  existing  society 
treat  it  as   inevitably  unjust.     The  theoretic  basis  of 


THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM  163 

this  Socialistic  criticism  is  Marx's  doctrine  of  "extra 
value " :  in  plain  English,  the  assertion  that  every 
employer  gains  his  wealth  by  under-paying  his  hands. 
Marx  is  generally  repudiated  by  Socialists  to-day,  but 
they  still  use  the  word  "exploit";  and  that  word  is 
calumny  in  a  nutshell.  Again,  so  moderate  a  Socialist 
as  Professor  Werner  Sombart  takes  for  granted  the 
class  struggle  and  the  necessity  and  rightfulness  of 
class  bitterness.  Not  patriotism  but  class — worker  versus 
employer — is  to  inspire  the  social  democracy.  Naturally, 
if  existing  distribution  is  inevitably  unjust ;  unnaturally 
and  very  wrongly,  if  Marxism  cannot  be  proved. 

Even  Marx  admitted  that  fixed  capital  (buildings, 
machines,  &c.)  and  stock  (materials  and  manufactured 
goods  ready  for  sale  or  use)  must  be  maintained  un- 
diminished out  of  the  proceeds  of  industry.  But  any- 
thing beyond  that  he  treated  as  unjust,  especially 
(1)  interest,  or  payment  for  the  use  of  capital.  This 
is  a  very  old  and  respectable  prejudice,  perhaps  found 
even  in  the  Old  Testament  (Hebrews  might  lend  on 
interest  to  Gentiles,  but  not  to  fellow- Hebrews),  and 
repeated  by  Ruskin.  Economically  it  is  a  blunder,  and 
the  cool  judgment  of  John  Calvin  exposed  it.  When 
Aristotle  spoke  of  "  money  "as  "  barren  "  (and  therefore 
not  justly  earning  interest),  he  forgot  that  the  things 
bought  by  money-capital  are  far  from  barren.  From 
this  point  of  view  capital  is  a  magnified  tool  increasing 


i64  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

productiveness.  And,  so  long  as  we  do  not  embark 
on  the  tremendous  attempt  to  raise  capital  by  taxation, 
it  is  just  that  society  should  pay  the  capitalist  for  the 
use  of  his  savings.  The  burden  may  seem  heavy ; 
but  there  is  a  steady  tendency  (on  a  large  view)  for 
the  rate  of  interest  to  fall,  i.e.  the  burden  proportionally 
lessens. 

(2)  It  is  assumed  that  brain-work  earns  nothing, 
hand-work  everything.  This  again  is  plain  economic 
fallacy.  Good  brain-work  is  serviceable  to  the  com- 
munity and  deserves  in  justice  its  "wages  of  superin- 
tendence." (It  is  important,  however,  to  be  on  our 
guard  against  conditions  which  give  undue  power  to 
the  unscrupulous  business-man — not  qua  capitalist,  but 
qua  "  captain  of  industry,"  or  still  more  qua  financier.) 

If  it  ceases  to  charge  existing  society  with  radical 
injustice,  Socialism  may  still  contend  that  our  methods 
are  inexpedient  and  its  own  "a  more  excellent  way." 
Certainly  under  competition  there  is  economic  waste 
and  there  is  moral  loss.  The  difficulties  of  a  change 
to  Socialism  would  be  (1)  loss  of  individual  freedom. 
The  State — i.e.  the  bureaucracy — must  regulate  all  men's 
tasks,  if  waste  and  unemployment  are  to  vanish. 

(2)  Progress  must  be  forfeited.  We  are  suffering 
from  the  evils  of  unregulated  progress;  but  are  we 
content  to  banish  improvements  from  industrial  life  ? 
What    Government  department  is  free  from  red  tape 


THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM  165 

and  circumlocution  ?  What  official  person  welcomes 
a  better  but  novel  system  ?  It  is  a  significant  admission 
of  the  moderate  Socialist  Bernstein  that  those  branches 
of  industry  which  have  most  of  "  routine  "  in  them  are 
fittest  to  be  "  socialised."  Are  we  to  aim  at  universal 
Socialism — and  universal  routine  ? 

(3)  The  number  of  children  in  a  family  must  be 
limited  by  law.  No  State  can  guarantee  work  and 
food  to  the  whole  increase  of  population  which  is 
physiologically  possible.  Hitherto — at  whatever  grave 
cost — indirect  and  moral  checks  have  done  the  work. 
One  of  the  ablest  men  and  keenest  social  enthusiasts 
whom  the  writer  ever  knew  spoke  of  the  population 
difficulty  as  "  the  final  objection  to  Socialism." 

Ought  not  these  difficulties  to  give  pause,  even  to  the 
thoughtless? 

Hitherto,  at  least,  it  has  been  God's  will  to  discipline 
mankind  in  part  by  the  processes  of  economic  com- 
petition. If  we  are  to  co-operate  with  Him,  we  must  learn 
to  win  without  arrogance  and  to  lose  without  bitterness ; 
bearing  every  man  his  own  burden,  yet  looking  every 
man  also  to  the  things  of  others ;  having  the  same 
mind  that  was  in  Christ. 

We  do  not  deny  that  individualists  have  been 
Christians  or  that  Socialists  have  been  Christians ; 
but  we  believe  Christianity  requires  the  union  of  both 
attitudes,   each   being    true   in   its   assertions,   false    in 


166  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

its  denials.  Individualism,  ethically  interpreted,  stands 
for  personal  responsibility,  or,  if  we  prefer  other  words, 
for  personal  freedom.  "  Every  one  of  us  shall  give 
account  of  himself  to  God."  Socialism,  ethically  in- 
terpreted, stands  for  mutual  help.  "  Bear  ye  one 
another's  burdens."  It  may,  of  course,  be  contended 
(by  the  Socialist)  that  personal  responsibility  ought  not 
to  extend  to  economic  matters,  or  (by  the  individualist) 
that  the  State  is  to  be  warned  off  the  territory  of  mutual 
help.  But  these  are  at  best  artificial  refinements.  We 
naturally  interpret  Christianity  as  finding  in  society  a 
moral  whole  composed  of  moral  parts.  We  naturally 
recognise  rights  in  the  community,  but  rights  which — 
while  they  subordinate  and  limit — do  not  extinguish 
the  rights  of  its  members.  If  there  are  no  rights,  there 
is  no  liberty  and  no  duty.  High  authority  has  told  us 
that,  if  schools  are  to  be  saved  from  the  bureaucratic 
tyranny  of  the  State,  each  school  must  be  free  within 
limits  to  work  out  its  own  plans.  Still  more  evidently 
must  the  family  have  its  freedom.  Real  evils  must  be 
tolerated  there  for  the  sake  of  a  greater  good.  Even  the 
Society  for  the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Children  has 
usually  been  able  to  revive  and  not  suppress  the  home. 
That  is  how  we  should  seek  to  act.  Had  there  been 
no  free-will,  there  could  have  been  no  sin.  If  there 
were  no  political  liberty,  there  could  be  no  democratic 
errors  or  excesses.     Socialism  might  seem  to  eradicate 


THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM  167 

social  evils  ;  but  what  if  the  price   was  the  extinction 
of  moral  good  ?     Christianity  could  never  endure  that. 

Remedies.  (1)  Foremost  of  all  stands  personal  religion. 
This  must  always  be  the  master  contribution  of  the 
Christian  Church.  True  religion  will  do  more  than  any 
other  factor  alike  for  the  virtue  and  for  the  happiness  of 
society. 

(2)  The  hard  individual  excellences  of  prudence  and 
forethought  must  be  developed  in  every  class  of  the 
community.  According  to  the  constitution  of  the 
universe,  easy-goingness  is  a  ruinously  defective  moral 
outfit.  God,  judged  by  "blind  unbelief,"  is  a  hard 
master  (Matt.  xxv.  24).  But  His  children  know  the 
tenderness  of  His  love.  In  the  endurance  of  hardness, 
as  good  soldiers  of  Christ,  we  gain  moral  fibre ;  we 
become  fit  for  service ;  we  win  our  souls. 

(3)  The  old  Liberal  programme  of  "  career  open  to 
talent,"  formulated  in  these  words  by  Napoleon  Bona- 
parte (of  all  men  !),  is  still  not  nearly  carried  out.  It 
is  expedient  for  society  that  the  poor  man's  clever  boy 
(or  girl)  shouU  rise  to  the  higher  and  more  delicate 
tasks  for  which  nature  has  fitted  him  ;  it  is  a  demand 
of  justice  on  his  own  behalf  that  he  should  have  oppor- 
tunity to  do  so.  In  order  to  this,  the  educational  ladder 
must  have  no  gaps  in  it ;  and  our  public  education  must 
be  such  as  really  prepares  for  a  happy  and  useful  life. 
Apprenticeship,  too,  must  be  studied  in  earnest. 


168  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

(4)  There  will  always  be  need  of  charity  for  those 
who  fail — some  by  fault,  more  perhaps  by  misfortune. 
All  should  have  further  opportunity.  To  speak  with 
contempt  of  "  sending  out  an  ambulance  "  ignores  the 
conditions  of  the  problem.  Are  we  omnipotent?  Has 
not  the  real  omnipotence  of  God,  who  is  love,  ordained 
a  fight?  We  may  be  "more  than  conquerors"  amid 
and  because  of  pain ;  banish  risk,  and  the  world  would 
be  a  well-drilled  penitentiary.  To  curse  "charity" 
and  claim  "justice "is  to  excommunicate  ourselves  from 
the  human  and  (assuredly)  from  the  Christian  fellow- 
ship. Voluntary  effort  has  a  life-giving  influence  which 
eludes  officialdom.  We  do  not  say  with  the  individualists 
that  State  help  is  necessarily  unjust,  but  that  State  help 
without  the  element  of  voluntary  service  lacks  one  of 
the  best  remedies  for  social  ill-fare.  On  the  other 
hand,  effort  must  be  organised,  and  must  be  guided  by 
wisdom,  as  in  the  noble  and  promising  Elberfeld  system 
(said  to  go  back  to  Thomas  Chalmers'  inspiration ; 
p.  1 6 1,  note). 

(5)  The  main  improvement  during  the  nineteenth 
century  was  the  reformation  of  industrial  custom 
to  meet  the  new  conditions.  This  was  done  by 
Trade  Unions,  their  (generally)  wholesome  work  being 
achieved  amid  a  storm  of  protests  from  the  older 
individualist  economics.  It  was  not  work  of  perfect 
unselfishness  or  perfect  wisdom  ("ca'  canny"),  but  it 


THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM  169 

was  needed.  When  custom  hardens  into  State  law 
(Eight  Hours  Bills),  there  is  no  room  for  protests  on 
behalf  of  personal  freedom.  Usages  deleterious  to 
society  are  no  man's  right.  But  there  is  grave  danger 
lest  law  should  move  too  heavily  and  too  slowly  when 
conditions  change. 

(6)  One  special  evil  is  known  as  sweating.  It  is 
the  lot  of  those  who  are  supremely  unfit  economically, 
and  who  therefore  find  themselves  stripped  of  almost 
every  rag  of  protective  custom.  It  is  hard  to  see  what 
remedy  will  avail  except  some  form  of  legislation.  It 
is  no  one's  right  to  labour  for  his  own  convenience 
(perhaps  for  pocket-money)  at  rates  which  mean  star- 
vation to  those  dependent  on  their  earnings.  Such 
behaviour  is  anti-social  and  anti-Christian. 

(7)  The  Christian  employer  must  be  appealed  to; 
even  non-Christians  may  rise  to  a  nobler  ambition  than 
money-making.  It  is  false  to  say  that  men  "are  not 
in  business  for  their  health."  They  are,  indeed;  for 
the  saving  or  for  the  loss  of  their  eternal  souls.  They 
have  immense  opportunities.  To  make  large  fortunes 
and  draw  large  cheques  for  "  charity "  is  no  substitute 
for  the  graver  duty  of  seeing  that  the  conditions  in 
their  employment  are  such  as  please  God  and  help 
men.  If  they  fail  in  business  while  aiming  at  this, 
and  if  the  failure  is  not  due  to  personal  slackness  or 
folly — why,  they  fail  nobly!     (But  they  will  not  fail.) 


iyo  CHRISTIAN    ETHICS 

It  is  calumny  to  say  that  all  fortunes  are  made  bl- 
under-paying employees  (p.  163);  but  some  fortunes 
owe  a  good  deal  to  such  shabbiness.  Here  law  can 
do  nothing.  Conscience  must  do  the  more.  It  is  a 
disgrace  to  the  Christian  name  when  Church  members 
(or  leaders !)  belong  to  the  pinching  and  grasping  type 
of  employer.  And  really  it  is  foolish  !  Bad  conditions 
are  unprofitable.  Willing  workers  serve  better  than 
driven  slaves. 

If  we  are  told  that  individual  effort  is  hopeless  in 
the  abyss,  and  that  external  changes  will  work  a  cure, 
the  reply  is— On  the  contrary,  no  society  will  ever 
please  Christ  or  keep  His  laws  without  diffused  in- 
dividual virtue  and  goodwill. 

(8)  The  purchaser  cannot  throw  all  responsibility  on 
the  employer;  yet  the  purchaser's  opportunities  are 
more  limited.  Blacklisting  of  obnoxious  firms  is  odious 
and  perhaps  dangerous.  More  is  to  be  hoped  from 
white  lists.  Two  questions  may  be  subjoined.  Is  our 
law  of  libel  fair  to  the  disinterested  critic  of  dangerous 
conditions  ?  And  might  not  a  far  larger  publicity  save 
us  from  many  industrial  evils  ?  (If  it  broke  some  weak 
firms  at  an  early  stage  in  their  career,  would  that  be  a 
real  social  loss  ?) 

(9)  For  the  grave  mischief  of  unemployment,  such 
obvious  remedies  as  genuine  bureaus  for  registration 
and  systems  of  insurance  ought  first  to  be  tried. 


THE    SOCIAL    PROBLEM  171 

(10)  All  detailed  reforms  should  be  encouraged  which 
are  consistent  with  a  regard  to  personal  character  and 
family  life.  It  was  no  sufficient  reason  for  ceasing  to 
collect  school  pence  that  the  costs  of  collection  con- 
sumed a  large  proportion  of  the  amount :  school  fees 
were  a  witness  to  a  parent's  duty.  Similarly,  if  school 
children  are  fed  by  public  authority,  all  recoverable 
costs  should  be  enforced  even  if  the  financial  gain  is 
not  great ;  they  will  stave  off  a  great  drop  in  character. 
Once  more :  contributory  old  age  pensions  have  a 
moral  claim  which  non-contributory  pensions  cannot 
advance.  But,  to  make  this  claim  absolute,  Govern- 
ment ought  to  offer  several  scales — giving  marked 
additional  benefit  to  the  man  with  small  means  who 
saves  upon  the  higher  scale. 

Slowly  and  bit  by  bit  ground  will  be  won — very 
slowly.  But  those  whose  hearts  are  right  with  God 
and  with  Christ  will  know  that  "labour  is  not  in  vain 
in  the  Lord." 


INDEX 


Abbott,  88 
Abraham,  37 
Abstinence,  91,  126,  151 
Accession  Psalms,  51 
Achan,  36 
Active  virtue,  129 
Alcohol,  91,  126,  151 
Altruism,  23,  26,  132,  152 
Amaziah,  37 
"Ambulances,"  168 
Amusement,  118,  121 
Anabaptists,  97 
Anarchy,  139,  140,  141 
Angels,  69 
Anglicanism,  81 
Apostles,  61 
Apprenticeship,  167 
Arbitrary  will,  84 
Aristotle,  26,  130,  163 
Arnold,  7,  125 
Atonement,  45,  86 
Authority,  51,  56,  6i,  84,  &:c. 

Bain,  84 

Baptism,  96,  97,  104 

of  Christ,  53 
Baptists,  82,  97 
Benevolence,  n,  21,  22,  23 
Bentham,  22 
Bernstein,  165 
"  Biogenesis,"  101 
Bismarck,  155 


173 


Blacklisting,  170 

Bradley,  23,  27,  117 

Broad  Church,  jj,  78,  98,  100 

Browning,  11 ,  70 

Buddhism,  68,  69 

Bushnell,  98 

Butler,  9,  11,  23,  107-8 

Calixtus,  3 

Calvin,  3,  79,  81,  163 

Campbell,  5 

Capital,  163 

Carey,  150 

Casuistry,  43-5,  50,  72,  115,  140 

Catechisms,  5,  10,  118 

Catholicism,  66,  86,  113,  142 

Ceremonial  Law,  33,  42 

Ceremonies,  91 

Chalmers,  161  n.,  168 

"  Charity,"  145,  168 

"  Chastity,"  68,  69,  73,  So 

Cheyne,  35,  38 

Christ's    teaching,    6,    29,    43-4, 

46,  &c. ,  85,  114 
Church,  churches,  58,  60,  90,  &c, 
142 
,,       and  State,  7,  94,  137,  149 
Citizenship,  26,  28,  89 
Cobbe,  Miss,  23 
Coleridge,  21 

Commands  of  Christ,  60,  61 
Competition,  160,  162 


174 


INDEX 


Comprehension,  149 
Comte,  23,  89,  132 
Confessional,  2,  72,  73 
Confirmation,  98,  &c.,  103 
Conscience,  24,  92-3 
Considerateness,  122 
Conversion,  ioo,  &c. 
Corban,  48,  136,  138 
Courage,  124,  125 
"  Covenant,"  book  of,  31 
Custom,  33,  90,  92,  121,  159,  168, 
169 

Dan^eus,  2,  3 
Daniel,  52 
David,  37 
Deans,  Jeanie,  133 
Decalogue,  3,  29,  &c. ,  62 
Decency,  63-4 
Decision,  13,  15 
Democracy,  79,  81,  141 
"  Direction,"  72 
Discipline,  92 
Division  of  duties,  118 
Divorce,  48,  136-7 
Dogma,  66 
Donatism,  71 
Dorner,  7 
Drink,  151 
Drummond,  101 
Duns,  84 

Ecce  Homo,  9,  129,  145 
Ecclesiasticus,  34 
Education  (Life  as),  107-8 
Egoism,  19,  21,  26 
Eight  Hours  Bills,  169 
Eighteenth  century,  82,  154 
Elberfeld  system,  168 
Employers'  duties,  169 
Endowments,  149 
Enthusiasm,  9,  57,  60,  63,  152 
Episcopacy,  64,  149 


Equality,  127 

"  Equilibrium,"  161 

Erskine,  107 

Eschatologies,  59,  &c,  66,  76 

Established  Churches,  149 

EthicalattributesofGod,  11,12,23 

Example  of  Christ,  60,  85 

"  Exploiting,"  163,  170 

Externalism,  43 

Ezekiel,  37,  38 

Faber,  70 
Faith,  96,  147 

,,      and  reason,  6 
Family,  80,  87,  120,  135,  &c. 
Fasting,  in 

Fatherhood  of  God,  44,  47,  48,  88 
Force,  88,  139,  155 
Foreign  Missions,  150 
Forsyth,  40,  86 
France,  153 
Francis,  St.,  69,  86 
Free,  Free-will,  14,  &c,  19,  24, 

27,  105,  166 

Gambling,  153 
Gladiators,  156 
Golden  rule,  48 
Gospel,  44 
Gospels,  46,  58 
Grace,  86,  95,  96 

Half-virtues,  134 

Hammurabi,  31 

Happiness,  18,  20,  ax,  22,  25 

Health,  119 

Hedonism,  18,  &c,  25 

Hegel,  27,  28 

Herrmann,  7,  118,  120 

Hinton,  25 

Home  Missions,  149 

Hooker,  78,  81,  &c. 

Hosea,  32,  38 


INDEX 


175 


Hospitality,  64 
Humanity,  54-5 
Humility,  86,  130 
Hypocrisy,  51 

Idealists,  19,  20 
Illingworth,  9 
Immanence,  6 
Immortality,  35,  38,  40,  42 
Imperfection  in  Old  Testament,  39 
Individual,  36,  &c. ,  40,  42 
Individualism,  24, 27, 160,  See. ,  166 
Industrial  revolution,  149,  159 
Institutions,  48-9,  135,  &c. 
Intuitionalism,  7,  20,  25 
Isaiah,  32,  38,  52 

,,      Second,  38,  51 
"Israel,"  35,  38 
Ivan  the  Fool,  156 

J.  37 

Jeremiah,  32,  37,  38 
Johannine  doctrine,  6 
John  the  Baptist,  53 
John's  Gospel,  46,  51,  58,  105 
Joy,  131,  134 
Judgment  to  come,  45 
Justice,  11,  23,  25,  36,  38,  39,  122, 
127,  133,  134,  164 

Kant,  25,  27,  117,  128 
Keswick  Movement,  146 
Kilpatrick,  9,  121  n. 
Kindness,  11.     See  Benevolence 
"  Kingdom  of  God,"  51 
Knight-errant  wars,  156 
Korah,  36 

Laissez-faire,  160 

Lapsi,  71 

Law,  31,  45,  48,  62,  66,  74,  76, 

95.  101 
Legalism,  3,  24,  27,  50 


Libel  law,  170 

Liberty,  81.     See  Free 

Liguori,  72 

Literalism,  51 

"  Logia,"  46 

Love,  12,  36,  48,  55,  59,  112,  122, 

128,  134 
Love,  Christ's,  58 
Lovelace,  137-8 
Loyalty,  64,  93,  141-2 
Luther,  75,  76,  78 
Lutheranism,  81 

Macgregor,  7 

Manners,  90 

Manu,  32 

Marriage,  80,  94,  138,  157 

Martensen,  8 

Martyrs,  65,  93 

Marx,  163 

Master  man,  161  n. 

Merit,  42,  44,  67,  74 

Messiah,  52,  54 

Mill,  22,  90 

Milton,  82 

Mission  Churches,  91,  151 

Monasticism,  67,  69 

Montanism,  71 

Moody,  113 

Moral  law,  24,  114 

"  Moral  theology,"  2,  3 

Moses,  29 

Napoleon,  167 

Nation,  80.     See  State 

Nationalism,  154 

Natural  and  supernatural,  6,  124 

"  Neighbour,"  44,  55,  118-19 

Novatianism,  71 

Nurture  (Christian),  98,  102 

Oaths,  55 
1  Obedience,  68-9,  105 


176 


INDEX 


Office-bearers,  63,  66 
Old  age  pensions,  171 
Old   Testament,    29,    &c,    43-9, 

62-3,  81 
Opinion  (public),  90,  92 
Opium,  91 
Overlapping,  149 

P,  36 

Paley,  21 

Parents,  87,  136,  138 

Pascal,  72 

Patience,  130 

Paul,   6,   29,  45,  60,  62-4,  75-6, 

83,  96,  114 
Peacemakers,  94 
"  People  of  the  land,"  49 
Perfection,  16,  17,  25,  47,  55,  63, 

68,  147 
Permissible,  11 6- 18 
Persecution,  64,  67,  81,  87,  141 
Pharisees,  27,  40,  &c,  49,  &c,  54, 

&c,  67,75 
Pietism,  jj,  99 
Plato,  26,  127,  162 
Political  party,  143-4 
Polygamy,  135 
"  Poor,"  49 
Population,  153,  165 
"  Poverty,"  68-9 
Prayer,  no 
"  Probabilism,"  72 
Probation,  106,  108,  no,  112 
Progress,  160,  164 
Prophets,  33,  36,  48,  51,  &c. 

,,         Christian,  67 
Proverbs,  34 
Prudence,  126,  134,  167 
Psalms,  33,  35,  38,  51-2,  no 
Publicity,  170 

Purchaser's  responsibilities,  170 
Puritans,  3,  17,  79,  87,  91 
Purity,  120 


Q,  Quelle,  46,  61 
Quakers,  82 

Race  problems,  1^4 
Rainy,  88 

Rashdall,  20,  114,  127,  130 
Reason,  6,  26,  27 
"  Rebellion,"  12,  13 
Recreation,  118,  121 
Redemption,  8,  12,  86,  102 
Reformation,  74,  75,  &c. ,  148 
"  Reformed,"  2,  3 
Repentance,  96,  130 
Respectability,  81,  134 
Responsibility,  14-16 
Resurrection,  38,  40,  42 
"  Reunion,"  148 
Revelation,  6 
Revenge,  55 
Revival,  ethical,  148 
Revivalism,  99-100,  103 
Righteousness,  49,  54,  56,  128, 134 
Rights,  24-5,  166 
Rigorism,  24,  27,  71 
Ritschl,  85,  90,  130 
Robertson,  137 
Roman  Church,  71 

,,       Empire,  64,  140 
Rothe,  4,  7 
Ruskin,  163 

Sacramentalism,  95,  100 
Sacraments,  66,  95-6,  103-4 
Sacrifice,  33,  42,  62.     See  Self 

of  Christ,  8,  57,  86 
Sadducees,  41 
Salvation,  12,  13,  16 
Sanctification,  147 
Sanhedrim,  50 
Schism,  148 
Schleiermacher,  3 
Schoolmen,  2,  75,  84 
Schools,  166-7,  171 


INDEX 


177 


Scotland,  79,  149 

Scott,  133 

Scribes,  41 

Scripture,  86 

Second  Coming,  59,  60,  66 

Self-denial,  111 

Self-love,  132 

Self-righteousness,  43 

Self-sacrifice,  56,  148 

Sensitiveness,  125 

Sermon  on  Mount,  47,  &c. ,  140 

Service,  109,  167 

Severity,  44,  68 

Sidgwick,  21 

Simon,  12 

Simplicity,  121 

Sin,  12,  &c,  16,  17,  38,  45,  124 

Sittlichkeit,  90 

Slavery,  65,  159 

Smith,  129 

Smyth,  8,  11,  119 

Socialism,  89,  162,  Sac. 

Society,  26,  89 

Societies  for  benevolence,  144 

Sombart,  163 

Spencer,  24,  128 

Spirit  of  God,  45,  60 

Standard  of  comfort,  162 

Standards,  84,  &c. 

State,  26-8,  49,  64,  88,  139,  &c. 

Stephen,  26 

Sternness  (in  Christ),  44,  68 

Stoics,  13,  102,  112 

Stranger,  36 

Strong,  9,  12 

Suicide,  119 

Supererogation,  67,  113 

"  Sweating,"  169 


Taste,  34,  90 
Teetotalism,  91,  126,  151-2 
Telemachus,  156 
Temperance,  126 
Temptation  of  Christ,  53 
Tertullian,  97 
Thankfulness,  131 
Toleration,  82 
Tolstoy,  88,  140,  156 
Trade  Unions,  168 
Traditions,  40,  43,  50,  92 
Tribute,  140 
Truthfulness,  23,  132-3 
Types,  33 

Unity,  91 

Universal  salvation,  106-7 
Universalist  hedonism,  22 
Universality  of  gospel,  47,  56 
"  Utilitarianism,"  23 

Vegetarianism,  154 
Veracity,  23,  132 
Vice,  82,  141 
Virtue,  113,  124,  &c. 
Vocation,  70,  85,  108,  114 

War,  89,  155 
Wesley,  17 

Will  of  God,  44,  48,  84,  109 
Wisdom,  34,  126 
Witch-burning,  87 
Woman  question,  157 
Wordsworth,  113 
Works,  76 
Worship,  90 

"Yellow  Peril,"  154 


Printed  by  Ballantyne,  Hanson  &>  Co. 
Edinburgh  &>  London 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01101   6690 


